Some updates from this week. Additional ballast for the new P1 and P2 tracks has been added, P1 station canopy supports going up, concrete poured for the main station building first floor, and the forecourt starting to be levelled.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Cambridge South new station construction progress.
- Thread starter whittlesfordok
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
What is the latest thinking on the opening date? I had been hoping for work to substantially finish in Q1 2025, with the station opening for the May timetable change, but now there are media references to "late" 2025 and I've even seen December mentioned.
Nicholas Lewis
On Moderation
The station structure looks a month or two away from completion with internal fitout then required then commissioning/training so maybe tight for May 25 and im surmising it needs a tweak to the timetable to allow times for additional calls so Dec 25 looks the most likely date. I guess they could incorporate times in the May TT so giviing themselves such earlier option.
Am I right then in thinking that all the track work, meaning all the pointwork to connect the four platforms, and the changes at Shepreth Branch Junction, will be completed in the Christmas / New Year shutdown, and that subsequently it will be what you might call the "non-railway" work, ie completing and fitting out the station buildings, access roads, signage, etc?
This week saw further work on the P1 platform and track. Notably the OLE masts have been installed.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Update 11th October: Highlights this week include the start of work on the access path across the country park, start of work on walls/doors for the station building, and further work on the P1/P2 OLE.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Update 11th October: Highlights this week include the start of work on the access path across the country park, start of work on walls/doors for the station building, and further work on the P1/P2 OLE.
Attachments
Last edited:
Update 17th October: I had the drone up again yesterday, so here are some photos. Good progress on the access path this week plus a chance to see how quickly the station roof is coming along - it looks like there might be some soil up there now for the green roof. Also work underway on the water main under the railway, OLE for P1/P2 and the extension to the country park.
Attachments
WesternBiker
Member
Brilliant - thank you for the continued photographic updates. We shall be moving to the area soon, so look forward to being users of the station, in due course!
weeklycommuter
Member
- Joined
- 2 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 627
AIUI no definite opening date has been set but the plan is the end of 2025, presumably the timetable change date in December 2025. If the opening of Cambridge South Station requires the new East Coast Mainline timetable the earliest possible opening date anyway would be the timetable change date in December 2025.
TiddlyPom
Member
A random question about the track layout.
At the southern end of the station the lines converge from four to two quite in quite a short distance after the platforms end, but at the northern end the two lines of the eastern (hospital side) platform converge at a turnout that is already in place, but the lines from the western platform continue for some distance before it all merges back down to two lines.
Does anyone know why it is different to the southern end?
At the southern end of the station the lines converge from four to two quite in quite a short distance after the platforms end, but at the northern end the two lines of the eastern (hospital side) platform converge at a turnout that is already in place, but the lines from the western platform continue for some distance before it all merges back down to two lines.
Does anyone know why it is different to the southern end?
Don’t know for sure, but my best guess was that a certain amount of 4 track running was needed for the timetable and it was perhaps easier to fit this in on the north side.
Meanwhile at the site there has been work again this weekend. Crane has been on site lifting then island roof in to place. Also work going on on the track north and south of the new station.
Anyone know what the big metal H on the ground is for to the north of P2/P3? Looks like it might be a signal gantry or OLE but both already look catered for and it’s very substantial.
And for those following along - yet more helicopters and cranes together!
Attachments
Signals usually require an overlap past the signal to be clear before a train can be signalled towards that signal. For a train to be signalled into one platform while the other platform has a train present requires the merge point to be clear of the overlap. However on approach to a station the rear of the train just needs to be clear of the points before they can be switched and another train signalled into the other platform. If there are physical constraints north of the station the northbound lines would be prioritised for the longer distance.
The preference would be both ends some distance away as the rear of the train will be going slowly arriving into the station - further back would allow clearing the route for the other platform quicker. On the planning application at least the southbound end had both pairs of line converging around Addenbrooke's road bridge. This looks roughly the same distance as the northbound lines at the north end. It might be that the south end the lines aren't in the final position yet.
Some photos from this morning. Another crane has arrived. Maybe they are going to lift in the P1 canopy now?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Edit 30th October: progress this week on the new OLE with one contact wire now in place. The canopy is also being installed for P1 and some supports have appeared in the forecourt which I guess are for bike parking.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Edit 30th October: progress this week on the new OLE with one contact wire now in place. The canopy is also being installed for P1 and some supports have appeared in the forecourt which I guess are for bike parking.
Attachments
Last edited:
WesternBiker
Member
Thank you for the new pictures.
Yes, the supports in the forecourt are for bike parking - it's a green roof, albeit all the designs show more "landscaped planting" than a standard green roof. (I'm sure there's a technical term for that, but I don't know it.) The main building roofs do seem to be taking an age to complete, but I guess that reflects the preparation for those green roofs, too. Good to see wires going up.
windjabbers
Member
Yes, this is my understanding, that with Cambridge station been so close to Cambridge South. Having two platforms available for both the up and down lines allow a 3 mins headway between services to be maintain.
For example, a train can be dispatched from Cambridge in the up direction without the need for a second train which is already at platform at Cambridge South to have left as the first train can be signalled into the vacant platform at South. The same in reverse in the down direction.
In addition, though, I believe that East West Rail will require more four tracking between Cambridge and Cambridge South (In addition to extra platforms at Cambridge). But that possible belongs on another thread!
EWR, on the current plan, will need four tracks not only between Cambridge and Cambridge South, but also between Cambridge South and Shepreth Branch Junction. I would have voted for four-tracking the whole stretch now to build in resilience and future capacity. As it stands we will have -
Four tracks under the footbridge at Shepreth Branch Junction (two WAML, two Royston)
Tapering to two as you go north from there
Widening to four for the new station
Tapering back to two north of the new station
Widening to three after the Long Road bridge
And finally widening to four just south of the Hills Road bridge.
That seems to be building in a lot of potential points (weak pun intended) of failure.
I get the narrowing between Cambridge and Cambridge South - saves rebuilding the bridge taking Long Road over the railway. If it's not essential now, leave it until later. The narrowing between Cambridge South and Shepreth Branch Junction, AIUI, serves the purpose of merging the lines and getting the trains in position so that the platforms at Cambridge South can be paired by direction, which if there's the line capacity for it, saves you building any grade separation.
When EWR comes though and the bottlenecks get removed, then AIUI the current plan is that lines become paired by use. Presumably at Cambridge main Shepreth Branch trains will get exclusive use of platforms 1-4, and the WAML services will get 7 and 8 (and maybe 9 and 10, if they get built).
When EWR comes though and the bottlenecks get removed, then AIUI the current plan is that lines become paired by use. Presumably at Cambridge main Shepreth Branch trains will get exclusive use of platforms 1-4, and the WAML services will get 7 and 8 (and maybe 9 and 10, if they get built).
Last edited:
The first round of consultation on Cambridge South included 4 tracks all the way from Shepreth Branch Junction to Cambridge. The track layout that we are getting was one of the many changes later in the consultation process. Avoiding having to replace Long Road bridge was a key factor.
The bit I would have kept was an additional down line all the way from Shepreth Branch Junction to the new station, so that trains from Liverpool Street and Kings Cross could arrive simultaneously. This would have been relatively straightforward, apart from crossing the Nine Wells stream.
The bit I would have kept was an additional down line all the way from Shepreth Branch Junction to the new station, so that trains from Liverpool Street and Kings Cross could arrive simultaneously. This would have been relatively straightforward, apart from crossing the Nine Wells stream.
I would have also liked to see four tracks all the way south to the junction, but I assume the risk of objections to the land take derailing the whole project wasn’t worth it.
As a local I am more sanguine on the long road bridge. It is heavily used by cars and the diversion would be long and on congested roads. I hope EWR can come up with a way of doing it over Easter or Christmas as the thought of months of gridlock doesn’t fill me with much joy.
As a local I am more sanguine on the long road bridge. It is heavily used by cars and the diversion would be long and on congested roads. I hope EWR can come up with a way of doing it over Easter or Christmas as the thought of months of gridlock doesn’t fill me with much joy.
jammmmmsssssss
Member
They probably could do it from start of July to end of August without causing too much congestion. During term time the congestion would be awful
Depending on the duration required at Long Road...would it be viable to build a parallel temporary bridge with severe weight/speed restrictions for the duration of the construction of the real new bridge? Anything heavier than a car would still be sent on the diversion, but it would hopefully provide connectivity for the vast majority.
jammmmmsssssss
Member
Don't think so as it's on quite a high embankment and the college sports ground is right below it and the access road for st Mary's sport ground is on the other side
The high embankment that takes Long Road over the railway extends westwards to the bridge over the busway (the old track towards Bedford). The western end of the skew onto a temporary bridge would have to be constructed at embankment level, not ground level.
There would also be a huge debit in the biodiversity net gain calculation as there are a lot of trees. Some of those will have to be cleared anyway to install a new bridge span.
I also think that it would have to be a summer holiday road and rail closure. Hopefully there would be a way of still bringing trains in and out of Cambridge South in the London direction. If so, then it is something far easier done after the new station is open than before.
Anyone know if the abutments at Long Road are far enough apart for 4 tracks? The existing bridge is supported on them and additional metal supports either side of the track bed. I wonder if there is enough space (and strength) such that the deck could be replaced with one that doesn’t require the intermediate support. Or perhaps a single central support. I fear we are getting into speculation though 
.
I haven’t been down to the station site today but I can hear engineering trains from the garden so there is probably some interesting activity going on.
.I haven’t been down to the station site today but I can hear engineering trains from the garden so there is probably some interesting activity going on.
Effectively yes. It would have triggered the consent moving from an Order indre the Transport & Works Act (TWO) to a Development Consent Order (DCO). The latter needs a more detailed level of design to progress, so you need to be absolutely certain of what you want to build. Also, every special consent like this has a ‘statement of case’ that shows unequivocally why you need to make the change of land use (and compulsory purchase if required), and if someone could show that you didn’t need 4 tracks to Shepreth to enable Cambridge South alone, then the whole lot gets canned.
On top of that is the cash - another few miles of 4 tracking is not chap as we know, and EWR to Cambridge was looking decidely shaky a few years back (IMHO it is not yet out of the woods), so spending another couple of hundred million wquid on somethign that might not be needed when there are other pressing needs for railway capital investment is, at best, profligate.
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 8,430
I think I have said this elsewhere but the pairing methods used I feel depends upon whether EWR terminates at Cambridge or carries on beyond Cambridge to Ely / Norwich or towards Ipswich as has been talked about over the years.
If EWR terminates at Cambridge then an Up Down Up Down formation seems feasible. C
2Cs and EWR using Platfoforms 2 and 3, 1Ts in Platforms 1 and 4 and 9S in 7 services from Stansted and Liverpool Street via 8 and new platforms 9 and 10. However if EWR go beyond Cambridge then Up Up Down Down would be better with a flyover at Shepreth Branch Jn. 2Cs in 2 and 3, 9S in 7 and 8. Remaining Through Down services through 1 and 4 and Through Up services via 9 and 10.
jammmmmsssssss
Member
The railway probably won't be closed as long as the road
I was able to get some photos just now of the work this weekend around the station area. There was another possession and it looks like worked continued on the island canopy plus the installation of two more sets of points on the down line either side of the station. I think that means the track through P4 is now in the final location. The south set of points on the down line is surprisingly just south of Addenbrookes Road. It is also much easier to see what the final station layout is going to look like now.
There were lights in the distance at Shrepreth branch junction suggesting work was ongoing but I didn’t get down that way to take a look.
There were lights in the distance at Shrepreth branch junction suggesting work was ongoing but I didn’t get down that way to take a look.
Attachments
Seems we don't know how to do this stuff any more. Half a century ago when I was a schoolboy they built new bridge abutments at New Malden station, and over one weekend posession they rolled the span for two of the tracks into place and it was open for Monday's rush hour. Then they came back a few weeks later and did the other two, I went to watch and it was an impressive project. https://maldensandcoombeheritagesociety.weebly.com/the-over-bridge.html
Edit: It says here it was done in 1961. All the local children used to watch the trains from the footbridge where this geocache is https://www.geocaching.com/geocache/GC1JHYD.
Can't see any reason this couldn't be done at Long Road, it is a busy road but it is not as though it on a congested site between parades of shops like NM.
And all this piecemeal four-tracking makes no sense either (except for getting round obstacles in the approval process). Another example: the M3 was turned into a smart motorway with not enough refuge areas, now the two extra lanes are closed for the best part of two years while they build more refuges. Do they include the economic loss from the disruption to traffic in the business case?
Anyone know if the abutments at Long Road are far enough apart for 4 tracks? The existing bridge is supported on them and additional metal supports either side of the track bed. I wonder if there is enough space (and strength) such that the deck could be replaced with one that doesn’t require the intermediate support. Or perhaps a single central support. I fear we are getting into speculation though
I looked at this a while back and visited the site to see. It looked to me as if it would be feasible and maybe was originally built with that in mind. It was discussed last June, see #655 et seq https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...ion-construction-progress.141520/post-6257429
Last edited: