Chiltern Oxford Link completed

[ironstone11]

The attachment is the present layout. ??

To avoid confusion, attached is Page 3 / Phase 2B only.

 

[Cherry_Picker]

The Up and Down Jericho is going to get a bit of a caning. I am still of the belief that if E-W really takes off then Oxford North is going to become the new Colwich.

Can you provide a little more context here? Colwich is the junction which allows London - Stoke - Manchester trains to avoid Stafford & Norton Bridge isn't it?

 

[varkman]

I think the remake about Colwich Junction, Would be in the terms of trains using the Junction. East-West/Electric spin, Southampton to Sheffield. All the the Liners and car traffic to the west coast VIA Bicester/Claydon. Dream on i think!? But do the DFT/ORR really understand the Railway. Or is it just the Politics taking over again?

 

[route:oxford]

That thing has got to be the largest footbridge I have ever seen - it really is huge.
And people wonder why we still have huge quantities of level crossings.

It has to be fit for purpose.

Why shouldn't 2 mobility scooter users be able to scoot side by side holding hands in public when a walking couple using the stairs can do so?

 

[The Planner]

Varkman has hit the nail on the head, it has the potential to be a nightmare due to the conflictions if traffic really ramped up.

 

[varkman]

Varkman has hit the nail on the head, it has the potential to be a nightmare due to the conflictions if traffic really ramped up.

Yep. Oxford is a bottle neck. Has been for years now. A down relief line to Wolvercot is only moving the same problem a bit further north. Oxford North Junctions is a very Slow Junction today. Very little room to speed it up. For the East-West/Electric Spin would have to be a Reading West junction Job. Fly over the lot. Not going to happen, City Council would kick off, not a very Railway minded lot at the best of times. Like there buses to much, over trains!

 

[Bill EWS]

Perhaps we should simply wait and watch what th rebuild is going o be like when completed. Far too many guesses and personal thoughts, rightly or wrongly, just complicate everything. I worked over the route when the old LNWR mainline was still in operation and the juntion with the GWR was qute reasonable. No doubt the new built junction will be as fast as they can build into it, or feel all is neccessary. LOved working over the Ox-Cam route when it was all double track and most of the block workings in place. Very reasonably fast until the Oxford end was reduced to single track and a very slow speed restriction put on it. It will be fantastic seeing the route fully opened once again. Passed over the cross-country section a week past Saturday when return from visiting the Buckingham Rlwy Centre, via Aylesbury, P. Riceborough, Banbury and Oxford and found it interesting looking down on the work for the new cord line, another very welcome connection once it is up and running. I get pretty depressed with all the negativity that abounds these days. Whatever the new railway will look like it will be a fatastic improvement on it's present sad situation and something we shoul be rejoycing in, not complaining and criticising even before it it is built.

 

[jimm]

It has to be fit for purpose.

Why shouldn't 2 mobility scooter users be able to scoot side by side holding hands in public when a walking couple using the stairs can do so?

It has to fit in the land available and that particular site is constricted, to say the least. Lift towers would have produced similar howls of anguish from the neighbours and vandals would have broken lifts in about five minutes flat.

As the only pedestrian route across the railway for quite a distance, a step-only bridge in place of the level crossing was simply not an option and it's right next to Bicester's main park, so baby buggies are rather more of a consideration than mobility scooters. Longer ramp sections would have attracted idiots on bikes and skateboards.

Perhaps we should simply wait and watch what th rebuild is going o be like when completed. Far too many guesses and personal thoughts, rightly or wrongly, just complicate everything.... I get pretty depressed with all the negativity that abounds these days. Whatever the new railway will look like it will be a fatastic improvement on it's present sad situation and something we shoul be rejoycing in, not complaining and criticising even before it it is built.

Couldn't agree more.

 

[L&Y Robert]

Well maybe you should try looking at the website giving details of the work programme, which I and others have linked to several times now in this thread

"Yes, yes, I've read all that" he replied testily, and went on " - but I need to have it spelled out. The thing in the picture turns out to be a facing crossover after all, soon to be (or possibly has already been?) moved to its ultimate position and welded in to the eastbound somewhere behind the camera? Is that right?" And then, in more humble tone he went on "So the place where it now lies will have another turnout assemby - er, assembled - being the Gravy junction proper. Or one element of it, at least. I'll slip over tomorrow and have a look".

 

[HowardGWR]

To avoid confusion, attached is Page 3 / Phase 2B only.

Ironstone I believe the modern expression is 'my bad'. I just did not see there were three pages, thank you very much. Yes I see the point the Planner is making now. It'll have to change of course.

 

[L&Y Robert]

To avoid confusion, attached is Page 3 / Phase 2B only.

Ah! we of little faith . . . This afternoon (Monday 12th May) I popped down to Gravy junction, and lo! it has all been installed exactly as the track diagram! Also, just north of the London Road crossing is a trailing crossover linking a new a bit of track to the nice new Bletchley direction road. (Please, somebody, which is "UP" and which is "Down" on the Ox.-Bletchley, and on the chord as well). A man on the site told me the new footbridge is to be commisioned on Friday (that'll be 16th) and the temp. plywood walkway will then be dismantled. Nothing like a Site Visit to clear things up.

 

[swt_passenger]

In the various drawings available online that I linked to earlier, post #573, the main line through Gavray Jn eastbound towards Bletchley is the Up Claydon, and westbound towards Bicester/Oxford is the Down Claydon, The Bicester Chord lines are labelled 'Up Wretchwick' towards Marylebone, and therefore 'Down Wretchwick' towards Bicester/Oxford. (These must presumably be named after Little Wretchwick Farm south east of Bicester.)

(As an aside - are you writing "Gravy Junction" intentionally, or is it being auto spell checked?)

 

[The Planner]

Pretty sure the "Wretchwick" name has been binned.

 

[swt_passenger]

Pretty sure the "Wretchwick" name has been binned.

Not surprising. It doesn't really 'roll off the tongue' does it...

 

[Andyjs247]

In the various drawings available online that I linked to earlier, post #573, the main line through Gavray Jn eastbound towards Bletchley is the Up Claydon, and westbound towards Bicester/Oxford is the Down Claydon, The Bicester Chord lines are labelled 'Up Wretchwick' towards Marylebone, and therefore 'Down Wretchwick' towards Bicester/Oxford. (These must presumably be named after Little Wretchwick Farm south east of Bicester.)

(As an aside - are you writing "Gravy Junction" intentionally, or is it being auto spell checked?)

Would gravy junction be where you'd see a gravy train?!

The bicesteroxfordcollaboration website (see extract post #686) mentions Up Bletchley/Down Bletchley. I'm not 100% certain but from the description Down appears to be towards Bletchley/Claydon as the work on the Down seems more advanced. The direction also fits with the junctions at either end at Oxford and Bletchley.

 

[swt_passenger]

Would gravy junction be where you'd see a gravy train?!

The bicesteroxfordcollaboration website (see extract post #686) mentions Up Bletchley/Down Bletchley. I'm not 100% certain but from the description Down appears to be towards Bletchley/Claydon as the work on the Down seems more advanced. The direction also fits with the junctions at either end at Oxford and Bletchley.

It's quite possible it has changed round, because prior to EWR being brought into the combined scheme the original idea was to run on a dedicated single line into a bay at Oxford, signalled separately from Marylebone. However even though the full plans for Oxford aren't clear yet, leaving it all controlled from Marylebone no longer seems logical.

 

[Railcar B]

The Up and Down directions on the Oxford-Bletchley line are historic; the line was originally LNWR; therefore "Up" is towards Euston (ie Bletchley), and down is away from Euston (ie towards Oxford). Originally the LNWR had its own station at Oxford Rewley Road, which was a terminus. Oxford North Junction was a link between the LNWR & GWR. The LNWR (double) line ran from there to Rewley Road on the east side of the present (ex GWR) main line, and it's along that line that Chiltern's original independent line into Oxford was to run. As already discussed in this thread, the final layout has still to be determined.

 

[Andyjs247]

Just out of interest, how will Bicester Town be signalled during the interim period? As far as I know, London Road crossing was the boundary between Oxford and Claydon and the crossing itself is/was train crew operated. I guess it would make sense for Claydon to control beyond the crossing at least while there is no through route to Oxford and before the new chord is open to traffic.

 

[The Planner]

There are some new arrangements which I will have to check but currently north of the Banbury Road stone terminal it is treated as a siding.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Line designations are Down Bletchley from Oxford to Bicester and Up Bletchley from Bicester to Oxford, nothing is named as yet from Bicester onwards but you would suspect that naming convention to continue. The Wretchwick name has been done away with and replace with "Bicester South West Chord", which doesn't roll off the tongue any easier....

Junctions to the south with the MoD are Bicester Depot West Jn and Bicester Depot East Jn. London Road level crossing is CCTV with control from Marylebone.

 

[L&Y Robert]

(As an aside - are you writing "Gravy Junction" intentionally, or is it being auto spell checked?)

Yes, bad, I know, it's a family habit to degrade a name to something a bit more familiar. For example, we eat "Advercato pears", drive a "Sookie" car, listen to the "Radie-ro". Bit like the familiar degredation of Marie-la-bonne to our well-loved terminUS. So Gavray becomes Gravy. Sorry, folks.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That thing has got to be the largest footbridge I have ever seen - it really is huge.
And people wonder why we still have huge quantities of level crossings.

My son says "It's a dinosaur cage"!

 

[edwin_m]

There are some new arrangements which I will have to check but currently north of the Banbury Road stone terminal it is treated as a siding.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Line designations are Down Bletchley from Oxford to Bicester and Up Bletchley from Bicester to Oxford, nothing is named as yet from Bicester onwards but you would suspect that naming convention to continue. The Wretchwick name has been done away with and replace with "Bicester South West Chord", which doesn't roll off the tongue any easier....

That makes sense because only the Marylebone-Oxford trains will change designation en route, and they would have to do that somewhere because they arrive at Oxford facing towards Paddington. East-Wests (at least as far as Bedford) and Aylesbury-MKs will remain as "up" or "down" throughout their journey.

It's the other way round on my 2005 Western and LM Quail maps, so presumably someone has taken the sensible decision to flip it round before serious design work is done (flipping it afterwards would confuse everybody!).

 

[L&Y Robert]

The Wretchwick name has been done away with and replace with "Bicester South West Chord", which doesn't roll off the tongue any easier.....

Why do we call them "Chords?" Remembering my geometry, and thinking about the arrangment if drawn on plan, they are "Arcs", not chords. The chord associated with an arc is a streight line joining the two ends of the arc. I know these curved links have been called chords for decades by railway engineers, but it niggles every time I see it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

To avoid confusion, attached is Page 3 / Phase 2B only.

Looking at the diagram (post 691) at the Oxford end, it looks as though a train for Bletchley etc. leaving what we know today as the Parcels Platform will take the Up Loop to gain access to the 'Up Bletchley '. That means the "Up Loop" has to be bi-directional, doesn't it? Otherwise our train will have to snake out onto the "Up Main, over onto the Down Main, then a little distance north snake over back onto the Up Main, then onto the Up Loop, and finally onto the Down Bletchley. NO, I dont think so! Pathing nightmare!

 

[swt_passenger]

In broad terms isn't the railway usage of "chord" because of the setting out method used to produce the curve? They couldn't set out a full sized curve by drawing a full size radius on the ground, so they would use offsets from a straight chord length to set out the arc.

So the railway 'chord' is named after the process used to generate it rather than the geometrical term?

 

[L&Y Robert]

In broad terms isn't the railway usage of "chord" because of the setting out method used to produce the curve? They couldn't set out a full sized curve by drawing a full size radius on the ground, so they would use offsets from a straight chord length to set out the arc.

So the railway 'chord' is named after the process used to generate it rather than the geometrical term?

Yes, good point. Makes sense, that's what I would do if I had to set one out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I was describing the footbridge to an engineer friend of mine today, and he asked what was wrong with the existing at-grade footpath crossing on such a lightly used line! At this point I began to explain that the line was being up-graded to carry two distinct services, both of them brand-new, and there would be trains passing in one direction or the other every - er - every - how long? I didn't know, but somewhere in this thread maybe, someone has worked that out. He said "but isn't there a level crossing right there in the town? How often will that be closed? Closed more ot the time than open, I thought. Have we worked this out yet? Who knows?

 

[Andyjs247]

...somewhere in this thread maybe, someone has worked that out. He said "but isn't there a level crossing right there in the town? How often will that be closed? Closed more ot the time than open, I thought. Have we worked this out yet? Who knows?

Probably going from a maximum of 10 trains a week (2 per day if you're lucky) to an average of 10 an hour (2 tph OXF-MYB, 2 tph EWR, 1 freight/XC in each direction).

 

[The Planner]

Looking at the diagram (post 691) at the Oxford end, it looks as though a train for Bletchley etc. leaving what we know today as the Parcels Platform will take the Up Loop to gain access to the 'Up Bletchley '. That means the "Up Loop" has to be bi-directional, doesn't it? Otherwise our train will have to snake out onto the "Up Main, over onto the Down Main, then a little distance north snake over back onto the Up Main, then onto the Up Loop, and finally onto the Down Bletchley. NO, I dont think so! Pathing nightmare!

Ignore what is shown for Oxford. What is now the Jericho line will be made bi-directional and nothing will be required to cross the job.

 

[swt_passenger]

Ignore what is shown for Oxford. What is now the Jericho line will be made bi-directional and nothing will be required to cross the job.

That's for Chiltern's purposes, presumably. When/if EWR start running services through Oxford it will be a whole new ball game...

 

[CyrusWuff]

Why do we call them "Chords?" Remembering my geometry, and thinking about the arrangment if drawn on plan, they are "Arcs", not chords. The chord associated with an arc is a streight line joining the two ends of the arc. I know these curved links have been called chords for decades by railway engineers, but it niggles every time I see it.

Just to confuse matters, we also have "Curves" on the railway, such as the Graham Road Curve linking the Slow Lines between London Fields and Hackney Downs with the NLL.

 

[edwin_m]

Just to confuse matters, we also have "Curves" on the railway, such as the Graham Road Curve linking the Slow Lines between London Fields and Hackney Downs with the NLL.

Maybe they laid that one out with a pole and a very long piece of string?

 

[L&Y Robert]

Ignore what is shown for Oxford. What is now the Jericho line will be made bi-directional and nothing will be required to cross the job.

Looks to me from Google E as if there could be double track round the back (east side) of the carriage sidings as far as the Thames bridge. Then a nice double slip on the bridge (like the one in the Heathrow tunnel) and Hey Presto! we've arrived at the parcels platforms. With the connection to the GW retained, of course, for the E-W project. There! Solved!