Alternative proposals for East West Rail around Milton Keynes and Bletchley

[Bletchleyite]

Creating this thread to continue discussion that is a bit out of place in the EWR progress thread.

Still a crossing move from Platform 5 towards Milton Keynes crossing the Up Slow isn't it?

It isn't anywhere near as bad as blocking the Slows for several minutes while you run north from 3, change ends while blocking the line, then back south through 4.

FWIW, when the Southern is running late it is not entirely unusual to reverse it in 5 at Bletchley to get it back on time.

I think people are talking cross-purpose here, though - weren't we talking about reversing the Southern at Bletchley to free up a path?

 

[21C101]

It would be possible to operate, if you built the curve, Oxford-Oxford Pkwy-Winslow-Bletchley-MKC-Bedford. So Bletchley wouldn't lose out.



I certainly have (well, bar one station). It's quietish north of Watford, certainly, but with Watford only getting 1tph of the WCML IC service (MKC getting three) I think it going to MKC is important for connectivity. It's probably quietest south of Clapham, to be honest, so if I was going to lop anything out of it I would have it terminate at CLJ.

HS2 released capacity will give the option of some "residual" WCML fast line services stopping at Bletchley as well as MK.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Creating this thread to continue discussion that is a bit out of place in the EWR progress thread.



It isn't anywhere near as bad as blocking the Slows for several minutes while you run north from 3, change ends while blocking the line, then back south through 4.

FWIW, when the Southern is running late it is not entirely unusual to reverse it in 5 at Bletchley to get it back on time.

I think people are talking cross-purpose here, though - weren't we talking about reversing the Southern at Bletchley to free up a path?

Not entirely sure what the O/P is asking, but using the U&DR to Denbigh Hall is not a significant move. In theory, East West Rail is scoping (from the Winslow direction) three trains an hour (now it looks like Aylesbury is getting the axe).

They want two services to go to Milton Keynes (why?) and one to Bedford. In theory, it should be more to Bedford as the connections on that side are more significant than the ones from Milton Keynes, from where if you're going Oxford / Bicester to points towards the North West a Birmingham change will be just as easy.

In theory, Milton Keynes wants a half-hourly service to Oxford and so does Bedford; but if capacity issues exist I don't know what to suggest.

I would have said the Southern service was better as a half-hourly Watford to Croydon, the "Tring stopper" should be a Bletchley terminator every 30 minutes, and therefore that Berkhamsted and Hemel's semi-fast services should both go to Northampton. That frees up Platforms 2A and 2 for anything you so desire.

 

[Bletchleyite]

They want two services to go to Milton Keynes (why?)

Because it's considerably bigger than Bedford and is a destination in its own right, for both work and entertainment.

it should be more to Bedford as the connections on that side are more significant than the ones from Milton Keynes

Not really, Bedford's connections to the north (unless you want to go to Corby) are woeful and there is no plan to improve them.

In theory, Milton Keynes wants a half-hourly service to Oxford and so does Bedford; but if capacity issues exist I don't know what to suggest.
I would have said the Southern service was better as a half-hourly Watford to Croydon, the "Tring stopper" should be a Bletchley terminator every 30 minutes, and therefore that Berkhamsted and Hemel's semi-fast services should both go to Northampton. That frees up Platforms 2A and 2 for anything you so desire.

2A is completely unused at the moment anyway, the Southern is 8-car and uses 2. 2A is pretty much dedicated to EWR as a result, and with only 3-car DMUs likely to be used will be fine.

I'd love a 2tph Bletchley starter - it might be slow but there would be a good chance of a seat. Can't see that happening, though - wasn't it the original pattern years ago before the Tring "bay" work was done?

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Because it's considerably bigger than Bedford and is a destination in its own right, for both work and entertainment.



Not really, Bedford's connections to the north (unless you want to go to Corby) are woeful and there is no plan to improve them.



2A is completely unused at the moment anyway, the Southern is 8-car and uses 2. 2A is pretty much dedicated to EWR as a result, and with only 3-car DMUs likely to be used will be fine.

I'd love a 2tph Bletchley starter - it might be slow but there would be a good chance of a seat. Can't see that happening, though - wasn't it the original pattern years ago before the Tring "bay" work was done?

Just because Tring exists, doesn’t mean it should. Realistically with the train crew depot there, there’s no reason not to use the back platform and give one-change connectivity.

 

[mr_jrt]

Could you alter the trackwork at Bletchley to make turning things back there more practical, especially as once EWR is up and running through passenger services between the low level station and the Marston Vale are likely to be rare? i.e. Use platform 4 as a central turnback platform (and can still be connected at both ends so it can work from either direction), and route all through services through 3 & 5? No conflicting moves needed.

If you were feeling particularly creative you could reinstate the old western platform and bump the fasts one track over that way, giving 4 slow line platforms, or just do away with the western side entirely as I doubt the fasts will be stopping at Bletchley any time soon, which would give room to shuffle things over.

 

[21C101]

Whats this about Aylesbury to MK services being descoped (post upthread).

I really hope not. Trans Bucks connectivity was a core part of this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Could you alter the trackwork at Bletchley to make turning things back there more practical, especially as once EWR is up and running through passenger services between the low level station and the Marston Vale are likely to be rare? i.e. Use platform 4 as a central turnback platform (and can still be connected at both ends so it can work from either direction), and route all through services through 3 & 5? No conflicting moves needed.

That would seem feasible. Edit: You might want to fit a lift to platform 6 as part of that, though, as the Marston Vale sometimes uses 5 (and can potentially be routed in there even when not diagrammed to do so if assistance is booked), and 4 is not accessible from the Marston Vale as things stand (though I suppose that too could be changed).

(Not providing a lift to 6 was a proper cheaping out - presumably they thought the MV would close before too many people shouted...)

If you were feeling particularly creative you could reinstate the old western platform and bump the fasts one track over that way, giving 4 slow line platforms, or just do away with the western side entirely as I doubt the fasts will be stopping at Bletchley any time soon, which would give room to shuffle things over.

That rather less so, as all the buildings (including the signalling centre etc) are in the way.

Whats this about Aylesbury to MK services being descoped (post upthread).

I really hope not. Trans Bucks connectivity was a core part of this.

Yes, this is highly disappointing.

 

[21C101]

That would seem feasible.



That rather less so, as all the buildings (including the signalling centre etc) are in the way.



Yes, this is highly disappointing.

Seems to be rumour and conjecture at the moment, lets hope it stays that way

 

[The Planner]

Not entirely sure what the O/P is asking, but using the U&DR to Denbigh Hall is not a significant move. In theory, East West Rail is scoping (from the Winslow direction) three trains an hour (now it looks like Aylesbury is getting the axe).

They want two services to go to Milton Keynes (why?) and one to Bedford. In theory, it should be more to Bedford as the connections on that side are more significant than the ones from Milton Keynes, from where if you're going Oxford / Bicester to points towards the North West a Birmingham change will be just as easy.

In theory, Milton Keynes wants a half-hourly service to Oxford and so does Bedford; but if capacity issues exist I don't know what to suggest.

I would have said the Southern service was better as a half-hourly Watford to Croydon, the "Tring stopper" should be a Bletchley terminator every 30 minutes, and therefore that Berkhamsted and Hemel's semi-fast services should both go to Northampton. That frees up Platforms 2A and 2 for anything you so desire.

As I have said in a couple of other threads, for phase 2, MK is where the business case is. The rest is small fry.
Extend the Tring stopper and you lose a standard freight path.

Could you alter the trackwork at Bletchley to make turning things back there more practical, especially as once EWR is up and running through passenger services between the low level station and the Marston Vale are likely to be rare? i.e. Use platform 4 as a central turnback platform (and can still be connected at both ends so it can work from either direction), and route all through services through 3 & 5? No conflicting moves needed.

If you were feeling particularly creative you could reinstate the old western platform and bump the fasts one track over that way, giving 4 slow line platforms, or just do away with the western side entirely as I doubt the fasts will be stopping at Bletchley any time soon, which would give room to shuffle things over.

You can turn back in 4 and 5 (I missed 5 earlier). To do the same at Bletchley as MK/Tring would need a significant rebuild of Denbigh Hall South and Bletchley layouts to get the line speed. I am not aware of the Marston Vale services going up to the high level platforms, I would expect them to stay at the bottom.

Whats this about Aylesbury to MK services being descoped (post upthread).

I really hope not. Trans Bucks connectivity was a core part of this.

It might not be dead, but it is on life support. A lot of it stems on how HS2 progresses as they will be rebuilding the Quainton to Claydon section I suspect.

 

[Class 170101]

Creating this thread to continue discussion that is a bit out of place in the EWR progress thread.



It isn't anywhere near as bad as blocking the Slows for several minutes while you run north from 3, change ends while blocking the line, then back south through 4.

FWIW, when the Southern is running late it is not entirely unusual to reverse it in 5 at Bletchley to get it back on time.

I think people are talking cross-purpose here, though - weren't we talking about reversing the Southern at Bletchley to free up a path?

I was talking about Bletchley to Bedfrod services if they were extended to / from Milton Keynes they can reverse in Platform 5 at Bletchley then head along Route R2 (see attached https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/r1_1#T_BLTCHLY) and cross at Denbigh Hall South Jn onto the Slow Lines. If the Southern service was late it can reverse in Platforms 5 or 6 at Bletchley.

It might not be dead, but it is on life support. A lot of it stems on how HS2 progresses as they will be rebuilding the Quainton to Claydon section I suspect.

I'm surprised that EWR haven't looked at doubling the section between Aylesbury and Aylesbury Vale Parkway, it looks wide enough.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I was talking about Bletchley to Bedfrod services if they were extended to / from Milton Keynes they can reverse in Platform 5 at Bletchley then head along Route R2 (see attached https://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/r1_1#T_BLTCHLY) and cross at Denbigh Hall South Jn onto the Slow Lines. If the Southern service was late it can reverse in Platforms 5 or 6 at Bletchley.

Oh, I see. Yes, I can see the sense in that. The relief lines (once they are alongside the WCML) are dead straight, so if they're presently 30mph they could probably be upgraded easily enough; presently they are jointed bullhead rail, which doesn't matter as they are barely used.

The Southern often does reverse in P5 at Bletchley if it's running late enough for that to make sense.

6 is a bit short (but could be extended, and needs a lift adding) but it is technically possible. I have actually boarded a 12-car LNR service from 6 to Euston (only front 4 doors released) - may well be the only time it has ever happened! There was some sort of track or points issue which meant it arrived on the up relief, locally signed as the Up Bletchley[1] but R2 on your diagram, so had to go to 5 or 6 and I recall 5 had something in it, possibly a freight. It seems from the diagram you've posted that the connection from the Up Bletchley to 6 is no longer there, so it was possibly only the once!

[1] Actually spelt wrong on at least some of the signs.

 

[cle]

I'd be curious to know how many ride the Southern from north of Hemel to WLL stations, regularly - vs it serving as another local / Watford frequency.

It would be far better as 2tph Watford to Clapham, frankly - using Overground stock and as a core Overground line. Platform 10. The 75mph max speed wouldn't be too much of a hindrance given the short WCML intra-station hops from Wembley to Watford (and it skips Bushey which enables something catching it up to call there).

And there would be a WCML slow path north of Watford freed up for something else - maybe even two (e.g. a terminator at Tring and then a Marston reversal)

And anything freeing up Victoria to Windmill (10-12 car) slots is a winner.

 

[The Planner]

I'm surprised that EWR haven't looked at doubling the section between Aylesbury and Aylesbury Vale Parkway, it looks wide enough.

Same story as Risborough Aylesbury, if it isnt needed to deliver the service then they won't spend money on it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd be curious to know how many ride the Southern from north of Hemel to WLL stations, regularly - vs it serving as another local / Watford frequency.

I have used it like that though not at the moment. There aren't that many people who do, though; it gets really busy at Watford (and northbound is a useful connection off the 1816 Euston-Brum at Leighton for Bletchley).

And there would be a WCML slow path north of Watford freed up for something else - maybe even two (e.g. a terminator at Tring and then a Marston reversal)

I believe it did replace a Euston-Bletchley (or was it MKC?) local (which was truncated to Tring) when the present timetable came about? I can see that the former might actually be more useful. I'd accept that 2tph from Watford would be more use (absent building WCML platforms at Willesden which might be even more use) but I would want them to think about connections - these were typically awful, given that the whole service is geared up to getting people to Euston - northbound in the evening I believe it was something like a 25-minute wait at Watford, and the morning wasn't that much better.

The former Connex service was faster, though I don't recall where it called it definitely wasn't most stations like the present one is.

 

[The Planner]

And there would be a WCML slow path north of Watford freed up for something else - maybe even two (e.g. a terminator at Tring and then a Marston reversal)

I must be missing something, but if its only free north of Watford, how are you utilising it? I can't see any interest in terminating anything on the up north of Watford.

 

[Class 170101]

Same story as Risborough Aylesbury, if it isnt needed to deliver the service then they won't spend money on it.

I'm confused then why the suggested axing of the Aylesbury to Claydon LNE Jn section? Is it timetasble related, money related, HS2 related or something else?

 

[The Planner]

I'm confused then why the suggested axing of the Aylesbury to Claydon LNE Jn section? Is it timetasble related, money related, HS2 related or something else?

All of the above in parts.

 

[Bletchleyite]

All of the above in parts.

It's definitely a poor decision in my book, though, rather blinkered towards the idea of people making Oxford-Cambridge journeys (which hardly anyone does) and not considering intra-Home Counties journeys which people do rather more. Aylesbury-MK has two bus services plus a lot of car travel between the two, and if any part of it justifies a railway that does. Actually, and I know it won't happen, I'd bin Oxford off before I binned Aylesbury off.

Though I suppose it depends on the state of commuting post-COVID. One of the problems MK has is that there is a lot of inbound commuting (more than outbound, and there is a lot of that), but it's nearly all by car because unless you happen to live on the WCML or the routes of a very small number of regional bus services there is very poor public transport provision, and that (well, at least until March) was something very much in need of being solved - and even more so as MK grows and grows.

 

[mr_jrt]

In true network effect, I'm more tempted to sort Willesden Junction out with platforms, and scrap the Southern service entirely, and use the paths for more WLL LO services, and more WCML services. Does mean more changing at Clapham for Croydon though, which isn't ideal. Perhaps retain the Southern as a Willesden to South Croydon service?

Watford Junction's bay is not much use for the same reasons we're discussing about Bletchley - conflicting movements. I'd very much like to see 9/10 rebuilt as an island, with 9 being used for turnbacks...and maybe another island alongside that to give directional islands a-la Reading/OOC/etc.

 

[21C101]

In true network effect, I'm more tempted to sort Willesden Junction out with platforms, and scrap the Southern service entirely, and use the paths for more WLL LO services, and more WCML services. Does mean more changing at Clapham for Croydon though, which isn't ideal. Perhaps retain the Southern as a Willesden to South Croydon service?

Watford Junction's bay is not much use for the same reasons we're discussing about Bletchley - conflicting movements. I'd very much like to see 9/10 rebuilt as an island, with 9 being used for turnbacks...and maybe another island alongside that to give directional islands a-la Reading/OOC/etc.

There is a lot to be said for reinstating Willesdens Main Line Platforms post HS2.

 

[cle]

I must be missing something, but if its only free north of Watford, how are you utilising it? I can't see any interest in terminating anything on the up north of Watford.

If the Southern took over a former Euston service, there might be a way to juggle them if it the line was clear north of Watford? Not sure. Assuming HS2 are a complete revamp of services...

In true network effect, I'm more tempted to sort Willesden Junction out with platforms, and scrap the Southern service entirely, and use the paths for more WLL LO services, and more WCML services. Does mean more changing at Clapham for Croydon though, which isn't ideal. Perhaps retain the Southern as a Willesden to South Croydon service?

Watford Junction's bay is not much use for the same reasons we're discussing about Bletchley - conflicting movements. I'd very much like to see 9/10 rebuilt as an island, with 9 being used for turnbacks...and maybe another island alongside that to give directional islands a-la Reading/OOC/etc.

The Willesden Slows platforms are definitely worth doing. The Southerns wouldn't be on those lines, to that point.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I'd be curious to know how many ride the Southern from north of Hemel to WLL stations, regularly - vs it serving as another local / Watford frequency.

It would be far better as 2tph Watford to Clapham, frankly - using Overground stock and as a core Overground line. Platform 10. The 75mph max speed wouldn't be too much of a hindrance given the short WCML intra-station hops from Wembley to Watford (and it skips Bushey which enables something catching it up to call there).

And there would be a WCML slow path north of Watford freed up for something else - maybe even two (e.g. a terminator at Tring and then a Marston reversal)

And anything freeing up Victoria to Windmill (10-12 car) slots is a winner.

Or, when Croydon is unlocked, an 8 car from somewhere like Reigate or Tonbridge (just needs a south-side terminus) to Watford, using 377/2 or 377/7.

It would be a shame to just be Clapham to Watford. Croydon and Redhill to Watford at least gives plenty of one-change options across South London, Surrey and parts of Sussex to the West Coast.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is a lot to be said for reinstating Willesdens Main Line Platforms post HS2.

I would certainly agree; doing so (and calling more trains there) would allow the Southern to be removed completely and easier interchange with LO instead.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I would certainly agree; doing so (and calling more trains there) would allow the Southern to be removed completely and easier interchange with LO instead.

It is all quite complicated and there are various factors. Back in 1995 , OPRAF demanded the PSR have a 2 trains per hour at the metropolis of Cheddington , which basically set a MK - Euston slow train into the timetable. Fast forward to the same organisation which had let PUG2 with Virgin , suddenly realising that putting all of North London Railways , freight, Connex and "growth" onto the slow lines was a bit challenging. So this gave birth to a massive service recast in 2004 which brought in the present Tring slow terminators. (and a few other things) - poor Cheddington could never muster much more than 1 or 2 passengers a train off peak , and the slow Euston - Milton Keynes was virtually empty north of Hemel in any case. The likes of Leighton Buzzard - would plan their off peak travel around the hourly fast or semi-fast services in any case. Unless they fancied a bit of reading time.

The Connex "Brighton- Rugby - they would have loved to reach New St - minor issues of stock and paths in the Coventry corridor" - settled down to an useful MK - "South Croydon" for which a crossover was installed but really was East Croydon. In passing - the value of this service (in more normal times) for South London to Kensington and beyond and vice versa should not be underestimated. Would be even better used were it able to connect into more WCML services at the Junction. I would argue very strongly for the retention of a very useful service , as now. If not better.

Watford as a terminating point we have talked about before - you could argue that massive investment is surely needed - apart from missing a North Junction , the terminating moves from the south are awkward and the station is sorely deficient in both ambience , passenger flow capability and the rail / road / taxi interchange is extremely poor. Being very polite here. No one has really run with this one. What do you expect though for a town that sold its soul to the motor car in the 1980's and all sorts of other "recent" pressures on retail etc make it a case for some serious TLC and investment. (subject to funding "cough")

Willesden Low Level main line platforms were looked at quite hard in the mid 1990's - it could never have happened then - especially with the late decade capacity questions , - and even post HS2 I would challenge it's worth. A change of a very frequent service at Harrow and Wealdstone changing to a much better DC / Bakerloo line - the latter will have new trains hopefully , and the former has , is no great hardship. IMHO. Some money could be usefully spent on H&W station.

Issues of pathing Bletchley - MK seem to drive a lot of debate , which is a good thing. I have my own views - but let us see what comes back.

 

[Bletchleyite]

MK - "South Croydon" for which a crossover was installed but really was East Croydon

Yes, though in 4-car days a "naughty" double back (not naughty if on a Travelcard) was handy to ensure a seat

Willesden Low Level main line platforms were looked at quite hard in the mid 1990's - it could never have happened then - especially with the late decade capacity questions , - and even post HS2 I would challenge it's worth. A change of a very frequent service at Harrow and Wealdstone changing to a much better DC / Bakerloo line - the latter will have new trains hopefully , and the former has , is no great hardship. IMHO. Some money could be usefully spent on H&W station.

The trouble with that double change - which I've done - is that it adds sufficiently to the journey time so as to make via London quicker[1]. OK, you can still save money with a "route Kensington Olympia" ticket, but they're not worth buying for a day trip to anywhere that train serves directly (as an outboundary Travelcard covers it and is cheaper), and Croydon is not a well known holiday destination

[1] At times when Avanti serve MKC, via London is probably quicker anyway from there, but from most other stations the Southern wins, just.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The "Southern" is all about connectivity -a feature beloved of some residents of this forum. I agree , Croydon is not a holiday destination (and Watford certainly is not , though used to be popular for the Harry Potter market) - Croydon is a place which was always in my "not liked" venues for work visits , though Swindon was no 1 for that. You can get to an awful lot of places from Croydon , and the urban bleakness is tempered / improved by proper trams outside the station.

 

[The Planner]

Willesden Low Level main line platforms were looked at quite hard in the mid 1990's - it could never have happened then - especially with the late decade capacity questions , - and even post HS2 I would challenge it's worth. A change of a very frequent service at Harrow and Wealdstone changing to a much better DC / Bakerloo line - the latter will have new trains hopefully , and the former has , is no great hardship. IMHO. Some money could be usefully spent on H&W station.

This. It never gets past a fag packet, even now. It didn't even get past a temporary mitigation measure for early doors proposed Euston HS2 closures (not that there will be any in the medium term)

 

[ChiefPlanner]

This. It never gets past a fag packet, even now. It didn't even get past a temporary mitigation measure for early doors proposed Euston HS2 closures (not that there will be any in the medium term)

Agreed - Willesden has improved a bit from the days on a late turn , when the premises I went to get some junk food from (no Waitrose then) , had a shotgun raid on it which I missed by about 20 mins ! - the local travel needs are well served by urban services and there are no obvious flows from further out.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The "Southern" is all about connectivity -a feature beloved of some residents of this forum. I agree , Croydon is not a holiday destination (and Watford certainly is not , though used to be popular for the Harry Potter market) - Croydon is a place which was always in my "not liked" venues for work visits , though Swindon was no 1 for that. You can get to an awful lot of places from Croydon , and the urban bleakness is tempered / improved by proper trams outside the station.

You can indeed get to a lot of places from Croydon, and it's also a big centre for business (a 2-days-a-week commute to a contract in an office there was the reason for me having used the full route except MKC-BLY) though the connectivity "jewel in the crown" of the service is Clapham Junction, which gives you access to all of Southern and Southeastern's routes from the WCML without faffing about with the Tube, buses or taxis[1]. And it's cheaper fare-wise, too, typically the "route Kenny O" fares come in at about 2/3 of the fares via London for long distance Off Peak Returns.

It was also the only punctual and reliable service at Bletchley (other than those early morning services starting there) from the point of the introduction of the awful through Liverpool timetable up to its abandonment in March, though I'm not sure that's that much of an accolade given that the 1810 off East Croydon was cancelled more often than not when Southern had their bad patch.

[1] Thameslink and a 10 minute walk from St Pancras to Euston also offers that, to be fair, but it's quite a bit slower, well, it certainly was at the time because it was when they were on diversion.