Aylesbury to Princes Risboro’

[adamskiodp]

Hi folks

Hope all are safe and well?

I can’t find anything definitive using the search so here goes:

Has the line between Aylesbury and Princes Risboro’ alway been single track? If yes, were there ever any passing loops (say at Monks Risboro’)?

Were the bridges, both under and over the line built for double tracks?

Just wondered in case the fabled double tracking when the East Weat rail ever happens?

Regards,

 

[A0wen]

Hi folks

Hope all are safe and well?

I can’t find anything definitive using the search so here goes:

Has the line between Aylesbury and Princes Risboro’ alway been single track? If yes, were there ever any passing loops (say at Monks Risboro’)?

Were the bridges, both under and over the line built for double tracks?

Just wondered in case the fabled double tracking when the East Weat rail ever happens?

Regards,

Google is your friend....

Aylesbury–Princes Risborough line - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The line was built as a single track broad gauge branch of the Wycombe Railway in 1863. The branch became part of the Great Western Railway when the latter took over the Wycombe Railway in 1867. The GWR converted the line to standard gauge in 1870. The branch was incorporated into the newly formed Great Western and Great Central Joint Railway in 1906. Network SouthEast made the branch part of its Chiltern subdivision in the 1980s."

So looks like the answer is no it was never double track - whether the bridges etc are big enough, not sure, but some *may* be given it was originally built as broad gauge - though whether they would be suitable now.....

If you look on Google Streetview at the level crossing in the vicinity of Marsh Lane / N Lee Lane - it's quite clear that's only a single trackbed unlike double tracks which have been singled. Similar if you look at some of the bridges - quite clear these were only ever single track structures - i.e. the abutments aren't wide enough to have handled a 2 track deck.

And the double tracking I thought had been dropped ? Though others with better knowledge will be able to confirm.

 

[swt_passenger]

Google is your friend....

Aylesbury–Princes Risborough line - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

"The line was built as a single track broad gauge branch of the Wycombe Railway in 1863. The branch became part of the Great Western Railway when the latter took over the Wycombe Railway in 1867. The GWR converted the line to standard gauge in 1870. The branch was incorporated into the newly formed Great Western and Great Central Joint Railway in 1906. Network SouthEast made the branch part of its Chiltern subdivision in the 1980s."

So looks like the answer is no it was never double track - whether the bridges etc are big enough, not sure, but some *may* be given it was originally built as broad gauge - though whether they would be suitable now.....

If you look on Google Streetview at the level crossing in the vicinity of Marsh Lane / N Lee Lane - it's quite clear that's only a single trackbed unlike double tracks which have been singled. Similar if you look at some of the bridges - quite clear these were only ever single track structures - i.e. the abutments aren't wide enough to have handled a 2 track deck.

And the double tracking I thought had been dropped ? Though others with better knowledge will be able to confirm.

Early suggestions of improvements such as line speed improvements (but not redoubling) as part of EWR were never continued with after the 2016 changes, and a couple of years ago published service proposals had already dropped through running south of Aylesbury, and since then the Aylesbury - Milton Keynes service is now in doubt.

 

[geoffk]

The GWR's contribution to Aylesbury's railways (actually the first railway to reach the town). The GWR had a small shed there, a sub-shed of Slough and later of Neasden (GCR).

 

[The Planner]

Marsh Lane LC is always the problem that is on the difficult pile along there, irrespective of any aspiration of double tracking it.

 

[Gloster]

The line from Cheddington to Aylesbury predated the line from Risborough by more than twenty years as it was opened by the Aylesbury Railway in 1839. It was worked by the London & Birmingham Railway and bought by its successor the London & North Western Railway in 1846. It closed to passengers in 1953 and to goods ten years later. (All from a quick look at Mr W. Ikipedia’s well known pages as I can’t get at my books at the moment.)

 

[adamskiodp]

Thankyou all for some interesting replies.

 

[wildcard]

The early East-West Rail proposals included a passing loop along the line ( around Kimble AIUI ) . The idea being to facilitate freight and a Marylebone-High Wycombe-Aylesbury-MK service . That idea has now been dropped and the route curtailed to Aylesbury-MK and even that looks in doubt at present .

 

[adamskiodp]

The early East-West Rail proposals included a passing loop along the line ( around Kimble AIUI ) . The idea being to facilitate freight and a Marylebone-High Wycombe-Aylesbury-MK service . That idea has now been dropped and the route curtailed to Aylesbury-MK and even that looks in doubt at present .

Even with the continued expansion of the town, Aylesbury is yet again left with a much poorer rail transport service compared to towns of a similar size and distance from London.

 

[Dr Hoo]

Even with the continued expansion of the town, Aylesbury is yet again left with a much poorer rail transport service compared to towns of a similar size and distance from London.

It's not the only poorly-served town in that sort of orbit. Braintree isn't much smaller and has an even 'thinner' service with no real prospect of development either. But obviously most similar towns are at least on through routes.

 

[A0wen]

It's not the only poorly-served town in that sort of orbit. Braintree isn't much smaller and has an even 'thinner' service with no real prospect of development either. But obviously most similar towns are at least on through routes.

There is a bit of a difference - Braintree at least as a branch connects to a mainline with decent services, whereas Aylesbury *is* part of that mainline into Marylebone rather than a branch from it.

Aylesbury's lost out a bit over the years - the closure of the GC killed any journeys north and BR's general lack of interest in the remains of the old GC/Met/GC GW joint network meant it was particularly neglected even by BR standards.

History is fickle in this sense as well - had Milton Keynes been built a dozen or so miles further west and subsumed Buckingham, then I suspect Aylesbury may not have lost it's northwards rail connections.

 

[Dr Hoo]

There is a bit of a difference - Braintree at least as a branch connects to a mainline with decent services, whereas Aylesbury *is* part of that mainline into Marylebone rather than a branch from it.

Especially in the context of this thread surely Aylesbury has a branch to a main line as well, namely at Princes Risborough? Thence there are connections to Oxford and via Banbury.

 

[A0wen]

Especially in the context of this thread surely Aylesbury has a branch to a main line as well, namely at Princes Risborough? Thence there are connections to Oxford and via Banbury.

I get that - I think when you look at the state and general level of service particularly in the 70s and 80s, Braintree was in a far better position - it would have had at Witham direct connections to both London and Colchester that were more than 2 hourly, which is all the Banbury service was back then.

Now, it's got a better link via Princes Risborough to the West Mids, but nothing going north-east, at least not yet. Whereas Braintree does have connection to Colchester and Ipswich.

 

[adamskiodp]

Especially in the context of this thread surely Aylesbury has a branch to a main line as well, namely at Princes Risborough? Thence there are connections to Oxford and via Banbury.

As a ‘dead end’ (including AVP), but with a fast growing population, it has been left with a poor service especially to/from London compared to similar towns eg. Guildford, Stevenage, Chelmsford etc.

The Aylesbury-Wycombe-Marylebone route is usually much more of a ‘stopper’ compared to Haddenham (a much smaller population) and Wycombe, and the Amersham line is slow as it is stuck with Met line speeds. The London/Wycombe/Aylesbury/Milton Keynes route could have been a great service but seems to be on the back burner.

 

[RT4038]

Aylesbury's lost out a bit over the years - the closure of the GC killed any journeys north and BR's general lack of interest in the remains of the old GC/Met/GC GW joint network meant it was particularly neglected even by BR standards.

History is fickle in this sense as well - had Milton Keynes been built a dozen or so miles further west and subsumed Buckingham, then I suspect Aylesbury may not have lost it's northwards rail connections.

Except that, in spite of Milton Keynes being planned, the bulk of the Oxford-Cambridge line was closed, a year and a half after the mainline north of Aylesbury. Remember that Milton Keynes was envisaged as a car (and monorail) city, without much reference to old fashioned conventional railways.

 

[The Planner]

As a ‘dead end’ (including AVP), but with a fast growing population, it has been left with a poor service especially to/from London compared to similar towns eg. Guildford, Stevenage, Chelmsford etc.

The Aylesbury-Wycombe-Marylebone route is usually much more of a ‘stopper’ compared to Haddenham (a much smaller population) and Wycombe, and the Amersham line is slow as it is stuck with Met line speeds. The London/Wycombe/Aylesbury/Milton Keynes route could have been a great service but seems to be on the back burner.

Haddenham has a much wider park and ride catchment area though.

 

[cle]

As a ‘dead end’ (including AVP), but with a fast growing population, it has been left with a poor service especially to/from London compared to similar towns eg. Guildford, Stevenage, Chelmsford etc.

The Aylesbury-Wycombe-Marylebone route is usually much more of a ‘stopper’ compared to Haddenham (a much smaller population) and Wycombe, and the Amersham line is slow as it is stuck with Met line speeds. The London/Wycombe/Aylesbury/Milton Keynes route could have been a great service but seems to be on the back burner.

Back-burner is even optimistic at this stage. It does seem a waste of an especially nice straight bit of track north of AVP. There isn't much there to serve, but development potential is massive - as is connecting to the MK jobs market and points north.

 

[swt_passenger]

The London/Wycombe/Aylesbury/Milton Keynes route could have been a great service but seems to be on the back burner.

It’s not even on the back burner, as explained in the TWA inspector‘s report DfT had removed through services from Marylebone from the project scope in the 2016 review.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Adam, There is somewhere a You Tube cab ride, in a DMU I think, great views of the track bed and permanent way. There is a wide cutting about halfway on the journey between PR and Aylesbury which looks to me to be a candidate for a passing loop. You will see lots of foot crossings just after PR. Slow line speed. There was talk of running (from MK?) trains to London via this route but all on the backburner now. It also looks as if the line from Aylesbury to Claydon junction with EWR will be single track. I cannot see how they will squeeze 4 tracks in with HS2 from Quainton to Claydon

 

[Class 170101]

Now, it's got a better link via Princes Risborough to the West Mids, but nothing going north-east, at least not yet. Whereas Braintree does have connection to Colchester and Ipswich.

Can't always have good links in all directions. No rails towards Stansted or Cambridge.

 

[The Planner]

I cannot see how they will squeeze 4 tracks in with HS2 from Quainton to Claydon

Why? HS2 takes land for its formation, Aylesbury Calvert was originally two track, new formation south of Calvert to Claydon as part of EW.

 

[21C101]

Even with the continued expansion of the town, Aylesbury is yet again left with a much poorer rail transport service compared to towns of a similar size and distance from London.

That is disappointing. The whole point of the service was to have a trans bucks service linking places like High Wycombe to Milton Keynes, not just Aylesbury.

If that is kyboshed I hope they will extend one of the services via Amersham to MK and not just run an Aylesbury to Bletchley MK shuttle.

Why? HS2 takes land for its formation, Aylesbury Calvert was originally two track, new formation south of Calvert to Claydon as part of EW.

From memory HS2 is on the GC formation with a new single track beside it for E-W

 

[The Planner]

That is disappointing. The whole point of the service was to have a trans bucks service linking places like High Wycombe to Milton Keynes, not just Aylesbury.

If that is kyboshed I hope they will extend one of the services via Amersham to MK and not just run an Aylesbury to Bletchley MK shuttle.







From memory HS2 is on the GC formation with a new single track beside it for E-W

It will probably end up as one but there is room for two.

 

[wildcard]

That is disappointing. The whole point of the service was to have a trans bucks service linking places like High Wycombe to Milton Keynes, not just Aylesbury.

If that is kyboshed I hope they will extend one of the services via Amersham to MK and not just run an Aylesbury to Bletchley MK shuttle.







From memory HS2 is on the GC formation with a new single track beside it for E-W

Wycombe to MK will be possible albeit with a change at Bicester Village . Dependant on timetabling - I suspect the journey time won't favourably compare with a car (M40 to Bicester , A4421 then A421 into MK )

 

[A0wen]

That is disappointing. The whole point of the service was to have a trans bucks service linking places like High Wycombe to Milton Keynes, not just Aylesbury.

If that is kyboshed I hope they will extend one of the services via Amersham to MK and not just run an Aylesbury to Bletchley MK shuttle.

Well actually, the whole point of EWR wasn't a 'trans Bucks service' - it was to provide links on the Oxford - Milton Keynes - Cambridge 'arc' which is currently subject to development.

Bucks, like many other counties, doesn't have huge demand to travel across it - county boundaries are a quite unhelpful thing to look at in that sense. As ever with a rail-reinstatement, the first thing you need to look at is whether there is an existing public transport link which is being well used - and between MK and High Wycombe (your "trans Bucks link") there isn't. There used to be a through bus, but that fell by the wayside many years ago. There is demand for MK - Aylesbury - as can be seen by the the fact there's 2 or 3 buses an hour running between them, how many people will switch to the train though is unclear because the bus will serve places en-route that the train won't. The overall EWR has a similar situation - the X5 (or it did until very recently) covered the whole route on a regular basis - hence there is the demand for travel between those points.

Extending a Marylebone - Amersham - Aylesbury service to MK achieves what exactly ? Apart from potentially creating problems in the timetable ? It's unlikely to be used as an 'alternative' route to London given it takes an hour to go from Aylesbury to Marylebone - you can add 30 mins to get to MK - even the slowest LNW service will have got you to London 30 minutes earlier. Connectivity ? Again, where does the Chiltern line provide connectivity for / to ? Stoke Mandeville, Wendover and Missenden - unlikely. The northern Met bits will be just as quick either via Euston or changing at Harrow & Wealdstone and going to Harrow on the Hill.

 

[21C101]

Wycombe to MK will be possible albeit with a change at Bicester Village . Dependant on timetabling - I suspect the journey time won't favourably compare with a car (M40 to Bicester , A4421 then A421 into MK )

Might also be possible to run Marylebone to MK via Bicester Village. In fact it strikes me that Marylebone to Bedford via Bicester might be more useful than Bedford to Oxford.

Via Aylesbury too would be more useful.

They seem to have developed an aversion to running anything much more than shuttles on single lines.

Well actually, the whole point of EWR wasn't a 'trans Bucks service' - it was to provide links on the Oxford - Milton Keynes - Cambridge 'arc' which is currently subject to development.

The whole point was to do both.

 

[A0wen]

Wycombe to MK will be possible albeit with a change at Bicester Village . Dependant on timetabling - I suspect the journey time won't favourably compare with a car (M40 to Bicester , A4421 then A421 into MK )

Via the M40 is the *very* long way round - Google reckons the quickest way is via Aylesbury, but even then you're looking at a 60 minute journey. Train via Bicester Village would probably be similar.

 

[21C101]

Well actually, the whole point of EWR wasn't a 'trans Bucks service' - it was to provide links on the Oxford - Milton Keynes - Cambridge 'arc' which is currently subject to development.

Bucks, like many other counties, doesn't have huge demand to travel across it - county boundaries are a quite unhelpful thing to look at in that sense. As ever with a rail-reinstatement, the first thing you need to look at is whether there is an existing public transport link which is being well used - and between MK and High Wycombe (your "trans Bucks link") there isn't. There used to be a through bus, but that fell by the wayside many years ago. There is demand for MK - Aylesbury - as can be seen by the the fact there's 2 or 3 buses an hour running between them, how many people will switch to the train though is unclear because the bus will serve places en-route that the train won't. The overall EWR has a similar situation - the X5 (or it did until very recently) covered the whole route on a regular basis - hence there is the demand for travel between those points.

Extending a Marylebone - Amersham - Aylesbury service to MK achieves what exactly ? Apart from potentially creating problems in the timetable ? It's unlikely to be used as an 'alternative' route to London given it takes an hour to go from Aylesbury to Marylebone - you can add 30 mins to get to MK - even the slowest LNW service will have got you to London 30 minutes earlier. Connectivity ? Again, where does the Chiltern line provide connectivity for / to ? Stoke Mandeville, Wendover and Missenden - unlikely. The northern Met bits will be just as quick either via Euston or changing at Harrow & Wealdstone and going to Harrow on the Hill.

There are other places than London, such as Harrow on the Hill, Rickmansworth etc., especially now that the Croxley link has been canned so it is still not possible to go from Harrow on the Hill to Watford Junction and go north from there.

You also have to look at level of driving to a place not just getting a bus as the only people who endure rural buses for such journeys are those with no choice.

 

[A0wen]

The whole point was to do both.

The evidence that its objective was to provide a 'trans Bucks link' is where ?

As I said, 'trans Bucks' is a pretty meaningless, trite slogan. Bucks isn't even a coherent county - for people in Marlow or High Wycombe, what goes on in Milton Keynes is pretty irrelevant. It's the same situation you see in Northamptonshire, Essex, Derbyshire and many other counties up and down the country - which is why looking at rail links and saying 'oh, but it provides a link across a county' is an utter waste of time.

There are other places than London, such as Harrow on the Hill, Rickmansworth etc., especially now that the Croxley link has been canned so it is still not possible to go from Harrow on the Hill to Watford Junction and go north from there.

You also have to look at level of driving to a place not just getting a bus as the only people who endure rural buses for such journeys are those with no choice.

Harrow on the Hill is a 15 minute walk from Harrow and Wealdstone station.

Rickmansworth isn't a traffic destination - I take it you've been there ?

And Harrow on the Hill to Euston Square is 30 mins by Met - which means the journey time from MKC would be 90 mins - about 10 mins more than a via 'Aylesbury' service would be. And there isn't the traffic demand to justify it.

Further south of MK, EWR is irrelevant - so places like Watford aren't going to benefit from EWR - because any journey to somewhere like Aylesbury will still be quicker via London. In fact it will be no quicker than doing the existing combination of train / bus services.

 

[21C101]

Rickmansworth isn't a traffic destination - I take it you've been there ?

No it is a commuter town like all those other stations and with MK heading for a 500,000 population it is not inconceivable that people will use a train to commute there.

Point taken about Harrow but I think my point is valid for the rest.