I spotted the other day that the Bluebell have begun a consultation on their westward extension to Haywards Heath, and it got me musing again. Dusting off my very old proposal, I though it'd make for an interesting conversation if I'd gathered some more recent thoughts and opinions here. Heading off the immediate response, yes it smells very BML2-ey with all the baggage that entails. I genuinely think this is a much more practical solution to the problem BML2 purports to be solving though - additional capacity on the very congested Brighton mainline. Heading off the other likely response, yes, this would be very, very rubbish for the Bluebell after all their hard work. They should be compensated handsomely for that.
The gist is that whilst the Bluebell's extensions are fantastic, they should never have been lost to the national network in the first place, and the national network has to take priority over heritage operations. Accordingly, the first part of the proposal is fairly obvious: restore East Grinstead to Haywards Heath as an extension of the East Grinstead NR services with a modern double track electrified route.
The second part of the proposal is to implement NR's plans from a few years back to grade separate Keymer Junction and rebuild Wivelsfield with 4 platforms. I believe their intentions were to improve capacity by grade separating the junction, and the additional platforms were to give Brighton services somewhere to turnback without blocking the lines.
The third part is to widen to four tracks between Wivelsfield and Haywards Heath, widening the formation and building a short parallel viaduct adjacent to the Valebridge viaduct and adding either a second double track bore to the Haywards Heath tunnel, or a pair of flanking single track bores. Finally, grade separate Copyhold Junction as at Keymer.
This would provide additional capacity on the Brighton mainline by virtue of segregating the routes (though, if spare capacity was available you could also use the additional lines as loops for overtaking) whilst maintaining cross-platform connections for those needing them to access intermediate stations. The Eastbourne services could then be merged with the East Grinstead services, freeing up paths through Croydon (or not, as you could instead use them to combine frequencies to East Grinstead and Eastbourne). Having the lines paired by direction also means you could also mix and match, i.e. if capacity was available south of Copyhold but not north of it, then you could route additional Brighton/Hove services via East Grinstead to bypass the congestion.
Further interventions at Lewes for direct access to Brighton and at Croydon for more capacity where the branches meet are beyond the scope of this, though one or two obvious interventions spring to mind.
So, thoughts?
The gist is that whilst the Bluebell's extensions are fantastic, they should never have been lost to the national network in the first place, and the national network has to take priority over heritage operations. Accordingly, the first part of the proposal is fairly obvious: restore East Grinstead to Haywards Heath as an extension of the East Grinstead NR services with a modern double track electrified route.
The second part of the proposal is to implement NR's plans from a few years back to grade separate Keymer Junction and rebuild Wivelsfield with 4 platforms. I believe their intentions were to improve capacity by grade separating the junction, and the additional platforms were to give Brighton services somewhere to turnback without blocking the lines.
The third part is to widen to four tracks between Wivelsfield and Haywards Heath, widening the formation and building a short parallel viaduct adjacent to the Valebridge viaduct and adding either a second double track bore to the Haywards Heath tunnel, or a pair of flanking single track bores. Finally, grade separate Copyhold Junction as at Keymer.
This would provide additional capacity on the Brighton mainline by virtue of segregating the routes (though, if spare capacity was available you could also use the additional lines as loops for overtaking) whilst maintaining cross-platform connections for those needing them to access intermediate stations. The Eastbourne services could then be merged with the East Grinstead services, freeing up paths through Croydon (or not, as you could instead use them to combine frequencies to East Grinstead and Eastbourne). Having the lines paired by direction also means you could also mix and match, i.e. if capacity was available south of Copyhold but not north of it, then you could route additional Brighton/Hove services via East Grinstead to bypass the congestion.
Further interventions at Lewes for direct access to Brighton and at Croydon for more capacity where the branches meet are beyond the scope of this, though one or two obvious interventions spring to mind.
So, thoughts?
