Cambridge South new station construction progress.

[camflyer]

Update from Richard Clinnick on twitter (can't find any other source atm):

https://twitter.com/Richard_rail/status/1275003934839574529

It's (relatively predictably?) the northmost of the options, near the Busway bridge.

More info: https://www.cambridgeindependent.co...ion-on-biomedical-campus-is-revealed-9113825/

I didn't have a strong preference one way or the other between the options. I'm just pleased a choice was made and we can move onto the next step.

 

[dk1]

Excellent news. This will be such a popular station.

 

[camflyer]

Presumably since the northern option has been selected Cambridge (Central) to Cambridge South will be one of the shortest distances between two station stops. It can't be much more than a mile.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Presumably since the northern option has been selected Cambridge (Central) to Cambridge South will be one of the shortest distances between two station stops. It can't be much more than a mile.

Yes, a bit over a mile if my estimate on Google Maps is correct. Don't think that would be one of the shortest distances though - must be hundreds of pairs of stations closer than that across the country. Especially around London, Birmingham and Glasgow.

Great news to hear the plans are progressing.

 

[Ianno87]

Presumably since the northern option has been selected Cambridge (Central) to Cambridge South will be one of the shortest distances between two station stops. It can't be much more than a mile.

About a mile and a half.

 

[HSTEd]

Yes, if I was given some god-like powers that is the first thing I would do. Newmarket copes OK with a single platform 2 train per hour service but increase that (as planned) to 4 tph and then if the West Curve is ever reopened to allow services to Soham and Ely then the station will really need to expand - and there is an old station building with plentiful land right next door to it. As I understand from reports the main problem is that the ownership of the land and building is a "complex matter" of multiple parties being involved.

If done properly, a redevelopment of the area with a nice station building, parking, local bugs connections would be a fantastic gateway to the town. There's probably even space for a hotel and retail to help fund the work.

Well given the existance of Chafford Hundred, you can probably manage quite an intensive service before you really need a second platform.

 

[MikePJ]

There's a bit more detail on the Network Rail website here: https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/anglia/cambridge-south-station/

 

[MikePJ]

Linked off that page is this "Stakeholder Pack" - https://consultations.networkrail.co.uk/communications/cambridge-south/supporting_documents/Cambridge South Station Round One Stakeholder Information Pack.pdf

Paragraph 4.6 says

Due to the surrounding rail network being at capacity, the current proposal is to provide additional railway lines required to serve all of the platforms.
This would include expanding the current two and three track sections to four tracks north and south of the new station.

There's also repeated mention of the need to modify Long Road bridge - presumably to fit an extra track underneath it.

 

[TheDavibob]

If you can get beyond Mayor Palmer blowing his own trumpet, this release suggests the next phase of consultation will open on the 19th October.

This round of consultation will concentrate on access to the station and its facilities, to make sure the plans will work for the future users of Cambridge South. The station's development is being funded by the Department for Transport, the Cambridgeshire & Peterborough Combined Authority, the Greater Cambridge Partnership and AstraZeneca Ltd.

 

[jfowkes]

Article in the Cambridge Independent about the new station.

First look at Cambridge South railway station as Network Rail confirms second consultation

The public will be able to have its say over six weeks.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

Doesn't say much that's new. But it does say it will have four platforms, which doesn't seem right? Is that a mistake, or is there genuinely a need for that much platform capacity?

 

[camflyer]

Article in the Cambridge Independent about the new station.

First look at Cambridge South railway station as Network Rail confirms second consultation

The public will be able to have its say over six weeks.

www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk

Doesn't say much that's new. But it does say it will have four platforms, which doesn't seem right? Is that a mistake, or is there genuinely a need for that much platform capacity?

The Network Rail consultation site also says 4 platforms.

Cambridge South: a new station in the south of Cambridge - Network Rail - Citizen Space

This site contains consultations that are run by Network Rail.

consultations.networkrail.co.uk

I suppose it is future proofing for East West Rail.

 

[wagnaga]

The Network Rail consultation site also says 4 platforms.

Cambridge South: a new station in the south of Cambridge - Network Rail - Citizen Space

This site contains consultations that are run by Network Rail.

consultations.networkrail.co.uk

I suppose it is future proofing for East West Rail.

Does 4 platforms simplify life matters for parking in having one set for Liverpool Street and another for Kings Cross/St Pancras?

 

[Class 170101]

Four platforms needed for the station for existing services nevermind East, West Rail. If a standard two platform station was built you simply wouldn't get all the trains through there that run today (pre coronavirus before anyone asks)

 

[edwin_m]

I assume the idea is to four-track through from Shepreth Branch Junction to Cambridge.

 

[jfowkes]

Ah cool, thanks. Bigger project than I realised, I'd assumed they were just slapping platforms on the existing tracks.

 

[camflyer]

Ah cool, thanks. Bigger project than I realised, I'd assumed they were just slapping platforms on the existing tracks.

The "it just needs a couple of platforms" plan was from Mayor Palmer and Andrew Adonis for a pop-up station who thought you could get the whole thing up and running in a few months.

'We could have a new station open next year if Network Rail steps up'

Lord Adonis said 'it just needs a platform' and too much money was spent on Cambridge North

www.cambridge-news.co.uk

 

[Bald Rick]

If you had a 2 platform station, nothing could stop there. Or at least, nothing could stop there without rewriting the whole of the ECML and WAML timetables, and making pretty much every service that runs south of Cambridge 3-4 minutes slower than today.

Something that wa slots on the noble Lord and the Mayor.

 

[jfowkes]

Cool. Well, cycling to my new job will take me past the site every day so I'll be keen to see when they (eventually) start work.

 

[Bald Rick]

Cool. Well, cycling to my new job will take me past the site every day so I'll be keen to see when they (eventually) start work.

Will be a few years yet.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

The interesting thing however is that you have, from memory, a minimum of two paths per hour on the GN that go into the ‘old’ bays, two paths that go northbound into the legacy through platforms and two southbound via the new island (if that’s still correct), and two paths that go into and out of the new island (the TL Brighton stuff).

West Anglia stuff running over what I assume will be mostly the existing tracks into and out of the legacy through and new island platforms as they do Cambridge North is absolutely fine; same for XC. But when it comes to the stuff to/from Royston, you’re going to keep a similar if not slightly worse sense of ‘lock up’ of the Cambridge station throat, including in the cupboard by 147/149.

So unless there is something of a significant re-write to move XC and GA stuff to use only 7 and 8, and for those to only be through services, with GN using Platform 1 for the Brighton TL, Platform 2/3 for the Kings Cross stopper and then 4 for the Lynn and Ely (8 car unless they make it 12, with a possibility of a half-hourly southbound path through 7 and 8), with the other of 2/3 for East West (and no through services) then we are in trouble.

 

[CBlue]

I assume the idea is to four-track through from Shepreth Branch Junction to Cambridge.

If the documentation supplied with the second round of public consultation is anything to go by, it appears not sadly and seems to only be four track between Addenbrookes Road Bridge and the Busway bridge. https://twitter.com/markrwilliamson/status/1314185775802732550?s=19

A shame they didn't future-proof Long Road bridge when they rebuilt it for the Busway, but easy to say in hindsight.

 

[zwk500]

If the documentation supplied with the second round of public consultation is anything to go by, it appears not sadly and seems to only be four track between Addenbrookes Road Bridge and the Busway bridge. https://twitter.com/markrwilliamson/status/1314185775802732550?s=19

A shame they didn't future-proof Long Road bridge when they rebuilt it for the Busway, but easy to say in hindsight.

The panel on the upper left corner, with enhancement works and footbridge modification at Shepreth Branch jn itself suggests something is happening. The line is already electrified, and no great demand for W10/12 freight so not too many options remaining that would justify the cost of a new footbridge. It is possible that there's a separate project that is looking at 4-tracking the entire section, so it's not part of the Cambridge South Station project.

 

[edwin_m]

It may be that four-tracking further south will happen once a decision is made about how East West Rail approaches the station. If capacity is critical enough that alternating platforms are needed then something really needs doing about the flat junction at Shepreth Branch.

 

[Meerkat]

I don’t see why the marked track alteration area would go south of Shepreth on that leaflet (and have compounds dotted along toward the new station) unless they are four tracking that bit.
On the other hand I can’t explain why there is then no track alteration marked north of the station until almost at Cambridge station. It’s marked even if in NR boundary so it’s not that.

 

[Bald Rick]

If capacity is critical enough that alternating platforms are needed then something really needs doing about the flat junction at Shepreth Branch.

The need for 2 platforms in each direction, sometimes used alternately, is because some trains have to leave (or arrive) Cambridge at minimum headway to enable the timetable to work. With services at minimum headway, if the first train stops then the second will be delayed, even if it stops. That delay has implications elsewhere, not least the ECML and Welwyn, but also on journey times. With 4 platforms, that delay is avoided. It was an excellent piece of work that proved this, and I shan’t embarrass the forum member who did it!

Sorting Shepreth Branch Junction is an EWR ‘thing’.

 

[OxtedL]

The need for 2 platforms in each direction, sometimes used alternately, is because some trains have to leave (or arrive) Cambridge at minimum headway to enable the timetable to work. With services at minimum headway, if the first train stops then the second will be delayed, even if it stops. That delay has implications elsewhere, not least the ECML and Welwyn, but also on journey times. With 4 platforms, that delay is avoided. It was an excellent piece of work that proved this, and I shan’t embarrass the forum member who did it!

Sorting Shepreth Branch Junction is an EWR ‘thing’.

Reading between the lines, sounds like a paired by direction layout will be proposed at Cambridge South? At least for the initial construction

 

[Bald Rick]

Reading between the lines, sounds like a paired by direction layout will be proposed at Cambridge South? At least for the initial construction

It can’t be anything else.

 

[Class 170101]

Reading between the lines, sounds like a paired by direction layout will be proposed at Cambridge South? At least for the initial construction

It can’t be anything else.

Would be interested in your thought process @Bald Rick?

For me the problem is at Cambridge itself.

The long platforms of most use are on the Upside here. Platforms 1 and 4 have their own restrictions in terms of crossing moves but also overlaps which they share. (assume Platform 4 is 12 carriages by then from this link,
https://www.greateranglia.co.uk/abo...ation-be-extended-make-room-new-longer-trains )

Kings Cross Down services will need to cross at Cambridge to reach Platforms 7/8 if 12 carriages to terminate. Liverpool Street and Stansted down services will need to cross at Shepreth to reach paired by direction lines.

On the Up All Kings Cross services need to cross at Shepreth Branch Jn to head towards Hitchin and secondly those starting from Platform 2/3 will have to cross leaving Cambridge Station to reach Up Lines paired by direction.

I think it might be better for Up Down Kings Cross and Up Down Liverpool Street pairing of lines. Kings Cross services using Platforms 1 to 4 at Cambridge (but see below) and Liverpool Street / Stansted services using Platforms 7/8.

The issue then becomes Kings Cross to Kings Lynn / Ely services which I might well use Platform 4 and attach / detach there in both directions and leave the London End Unit there for the next service. This service group along with Ipswich to Cambridge services would be the only service groups crossing Liverpool Street / Stansted to Cambridge North / Birmingham services at north end of Cambridge.

 

[Ianno87]

Would be interested in your thought process @Bald Rick?

For me the problem is at Cambridge itself.

The long platforms of most use are on the Upside here. Platforms 1 and 4 have their own restrictions in terms of crossing moves but also overlaps which they share. (assume Platform 4 is 12 carriages by then from this link,
https://www.greateranglia.co.uk/abo...ation-be-extended-make-room-new-longer-trains )

Kings Cross Down services will need to cross at Cambridge to reach Platforms 7/8 if 12 carriages to terminate. Liverpool Street and Stansted down services will need to cross at Shepreth to reach paired by direction lines.

On the Up All Kings Cross services need to cross at Shepreth Branch Jn to head towards Hitchin and secondly those starting from Platform 2/3 will have to cross leaving Cambridge Station to reach Up Lines paired by direction.

I think it might be better for Up Down Kings Cross and Up Down Liverpool Street pairing of lines. Kings Cross services using Platforms 1 to 4 at Cambridge (but see below) and Liverpool Street / Stansted services using Platforms 7/8.

The issue then becomes Kings Cross to Kings Lynn / Ely services which I might well use Platform 4 and attach / detach there in both directions and leave the London End Unit there for the next service. This service group along with Ipswich to Cambridge services would be the only service groups crossing Liverpool Street / Stansted to Cambridge North / Birmingham services at north end of Cambridge.

I suppose you could argue that, until EWR comes along, you could theoetically accommodate Cambridge South (as a 4 platform station) by keeping Shepreth Branch Jn timings fixed exactly as they are today, and then fiddle everything northwards.

I.e. you kept the existing junction and then a short bit of two track before fanning to four track (Down/Down/Up/Up) for the station.

EWR of course will probably kibosh that logic completely...

 

[Class 170101]

I suppose you could argue that, until EWR comes along, you could theoetically accommodate Cambridge South (as a 4 platform station) by keeping Shepreth Branch Jn timings fixed exactly as they are today, and then fiddle everything northwards.

I.e. you kept the existing junction and then a short bit of two track before fanning to four track (Down/Down/Up/Up) for the station.

EWR of course will probably kibosh that logic completely...

Concievably I suppose but my view would be they need to either get on with EWR or have some appropriate idea of how EWR will interface with the existing railway and provide for appropriately.

It would be nice if EWR and Cambridge South were completed at the same time but I can't see that happening with our disjointed thinking.