Bourne End station

[Waddon]

Now that the line to Bourne End and Marlow is scheduled to be electrified, does anyone know the maximum length of train that can go onto the Marlow line at Bourne End? I'm wondering what stock will be used on this route as I don't think the platform track at Bourne End is long enough for 4 car trains, and there's no capacity to expand it in any direction... any information would be appreciated

 

[David Goddard]

I have been wondering this since the electrification was announced.

As far as I am aware, based on the latest TrackMaps book, you can only fit a two car unit into platform 1 at Bourne End- the only platform that you can reach Marlow from.

Platform 2 is a longer and is quoted as taking five cars.

TrackMaps also shows Marlow as only being able to take two cars.

The point qould be down to qhat constitutes a coach here. These quotes could be for Turbos, which have slightly longer bodies (22.91m) than the likes of the 150s (20.06m).
A two car Turbo unit comes in at almost 46 metres, with a three car hitting 68.5 metres.

The Cl317/318 etc bodies are of similar length (19.83m) therefore it may be that a three car combination (total just under 60m) of a unit such as these could fit into platform 1, enabling access to Marlow.
A difference of eight metres may be possible.

I have not, of course, been there with a tape measure and in any case as we all know it is not just a case of "will it fit", we have to take account of the clearance beyond the points, track circuits, signals etc.

Will be interesting to follow this one and see what is proposed to work the branch, and whether through trains continue, or we end up with the current peak arrangement all day (Three car Maidenhead shuttle meeting a two car Marlow Shuttle) but with the advantage of an increased frequency.

It is a while since we saw two car OHLE EMUs in the UK, but this may have to be explored if the platforms remain too short and a through service is to be maintained.

 

[route:oxford]

Well, not so hard really.

Compulsary purchase order the commercial property for the bits needed, move Bourne End station to the other side of the road and re-open the route to High Wycombe.

"Blend" the services so that the exiting non-through services remain diesel operated, with a reversal at High Wycome and onto Marylebone instead.

"Peak" services to contine to reverse at Bourne End.

Might as well put the "knitting" up all the way through to High Wycome - it'll be needed eventually.

 

[Waddon]

Well, not so hard really.

Compulsary purchase order the commercial property for the bits needed, move Bourne End station to the other side of the road and re-open the route to High Wycombe.

"Blend" the services so that the exiting non-through services remain diesel operated, with a reversal at High Wycome and onto Marylebone instead.

"Peak" services to contine to reverse at Bourne End.

Might as well put the "knitting" up all the way through to High Wycome - it'll be needed eventually.

Yeah, but the point is they have announced electrification all the way to Marlow as something they ARE going to do in the next control period, they haven't announced moving stations across the road or reconstructing to High Wycombe or anything like that, so that's not something they are going to do, at least not in the next financial period (and probably not in the foreseeable future either) .

Also a new level crossing of a busy road and a new station seems an unlikely solution. Plus, they are not going to string up wires and then not use them, keeping the tiny end stub service as diesel, that would just be ridiculous...

So they must have an idea of an interim solution for the electric wires they are putting up. Maybe some sort of Tram-Train arrangement? (I hope not)

 

[The Planner]

What does for the appendix say for the platform length ? as the Quail can be notoriously wrong in that respect. As for re-opening to High Wycombe, very unlikely.

 

[barrykas]

The Timetable Planning Rules quote 54m for Marlow, 125m for the Up at Bourne End and 47m from the mirror to stop line for the Down (67m from the top of the ramp and points to the stop line).

The Sectional Appendix agrees with the 54m and 125m lengths, but only quotes 47m for the Down at Bourne End.

Cheers,

Barry

 

[route:oxford]

Also a new level crossing of a busy road and a new station seems an unlikely solution.

You might call it a new level crossing of a busy road, I call it "road calming".

 

[NSEFAN]

You might call it a new level crossing of a busy road, I call it "road calming".

I understand that Network Rail are keen to reduce the number of level crossings, if at all possible. I wouldn't be suprised that IF the High Wycombe line was to be reopened that they would install a bridge for Station Road at Bourne End. Boston Road would have to be closed off and reinstated as railway, so this whole area would need to be redeveloped anyway. At the High Wycombe end, a new housing development now sits in between the Chiltern line and the old branch line. It could be remodelled, but it would be disruptive to the residents and probably expensive to buy up the houses!

This is all hypothetical anyway. There has been no serious talk of reopening the line to High Wycombe, as much as I would love to see it happen. I'm sure the residents of Woodburn Green and Loudwater would appreciate the service as well, given that Wycombe's roads seem to be getting busier and busier each year.

 

[CarltonA]

Fortunately the M40 was built while the line was still in place so there remains the possibility of reopening through the "tunnel", though remote for now. Having walked the old route I observe that some enterprising householders have incorporated some bridge abutments and some trackbed into their properties. Not sure if this "official" or not. I'm sure those people would be displeased if the line reopened.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

This is all hypothetical anyway. There has been no serious talk of reopening the line to High Wycombe, as much as I would love to see it happen. I'm sure the residents of Woodburn Green and Loudwater would appreciate the service as well, given that Wycombe's roads seem to be getting busier and busier each year.

The rather obvious fact that you have a largish town (High Wycombe) just a few miles away from a very large connurbation (Maidenhead-Slough) and then a major international airport just beyond that, yet no connecting railway would by itself suggest it ought to be a prime candidate for reopening. The journey opportunities made possible would be very significant. But as you say, it's not something that there appears to be any pressure for reopening soon, and there are problems with the land having been built on.

 

[RPM]

There has been a fair amount of (legal) encroachment on the old formation, small housing estates, gardens, school grounds etc. I would wholeheartedly support reopening of this line which should never have closed but I suspect the opposition would be powerful and overwhelming.

 

[Waddon]

But... returning to the original point of this thread, which was about the trains that are going to use the electrified Marlow line, does anyone have any ideas about what kind of rolling stock could be used on a newly electrified line with a 2 or maybe 3 car maximum length? Can any of the existing units due to be cascaded be shortened?

 

[David Goddard]

Current talk is for Class 319s to be cascaded to Thames Valley services.
If this does happen, and three car sets do fit at Bourne End then some of these could be reduced to three cars to use on the Windsor/Marlow/Henley branches and also Reading-Basingstoke stoppers. A fleet of about ten sets should suffice to cover the daily diagrams, through journeys to London from Henley and Marlow and maintenance spares.
The removed centre (non-pan) cars could then bolster a like number of sets up to five cars for strengthening of Newbury and Oxford Semi -fast trains.

Alternatively if Scotland get any more new EMUs then 318s or 320s could be cascaded South and cover these duties.
The 21 Cl318s, alongside the 24 Cl317/6s from Greater Anglia, would provide an ideally sized uniform fleet of three and four car EMUs for the Thames Valley, enabling three, four, six, seven or eight car trains to be operated as appropriate.

 

[joeykins82]

I know this is a slight tangent but does anyone know the reasoning behind terminating the electrification at Newbury given that the current suburban service pattern goes to Bedwyn?

 

[David Goddard]

Another mystery of the Great Western and Thames Valley electrification scheme. If services stay as is then the only ones on this section that would go electric would be the Reading-Newbury shuttle- bit of a waste of the OHLE really.
I am wondering whether the two TPH from Paddington that terminate at Reading might get extended all stations to Newbury, replacing and enhancing the shuttle, leaving the Bedwyns as semi fast and diesel operated. If Reading needs to retain diesels for the Gatwick then a few more for the Bedwyns would maintain a reasonable sized fleet to make the operation worthwhile.

 

[John55]

I know this is a slight tangent but does anyone know the reasoning behind terminating the electrification at Newbury given that the current suburban service pattern goes to Bedwyn?

Just a guess but;

Newbury.....1,494,000 passengers/yr
Bedwyn..........95,000 passengers/yr

 

[davido39]

Bourne End, hmmm, I could see a movie in that, be better than the latest offering!

 

[TEW]

Just a guess but;

Newbury.....1,494,000 passengers/yr
Bedwyn..........95,000 passengers/yr

In a way the real mystery is why did the NSE area extend to Bedwyn but not on to the more logical terminus of Westbury. Proposals are to run Bedwyn services with a semi-fast IEP service, hourly to Westbury and two-hourly to Exeter.

 

[David Goddard]

Interesting document from the people that this actually affects:
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse...responses/b/bedwyn trains passenger group.pdf

 

[mr_moo]

Back to the Bourne end question, there's one key point that no-one has mentioned yet. Under Crossrail, the Bourne end branch services becomes a simple shuttle to/from Maidenhead, with very few trains continuing to Paddington. A new bay platform is being built on the North West side to facilitate this as Crossrail services will be using the current platform 5 to turn around in (together with some moves in platform 3 and 4 too and usage of reversing sidings).

The new platform is proposed to be 70m long so this suggests maximum future aspirations of 3-car operation, although of what stock I haven't got a clue.

See http://www.crossrail.co.uk/assets/download/616 for more info.

 

[DXMachina]

There aren't many 3-car 25kv EMUs are there? 313, 320, 333, and 380 are all tied-up elsewhere (although I can see a certain logic to uniting the 332 and 333 fleets on the Thames Valley being that they have nothing in common with anything else...)

 

[TEW]

Back to the Bourne end question, there's one key point that no-one has mentioned yet. Under Crossrail, the Bourne end branch services becomes a simple shuttle to/from Maidenhead, with very few trains continuing to Paddington.

That's the service currently though. It's only a couple of peak trains that extend to and from Paddington. There won't be any requirement to provide through trains to Paddington in the new franchise though.

 

[David Goddard]

I would expect the current service provision/pattern on the Marlow and Henley branches to continue broadly as they are at present. There is no way in a million that the members of the respective passenger groups will let a TOC get away with curtailment of the through trains to London that they presently enjoy. Given that Mr Hopwood hails from the Marlow area too...