East West Mainline interchanges

[Magdalia]

I mentioned Birmingham in reply because the Cambridge-Birmingham time had already been mentioned in the discussion. But from Cambridge and Oxford I'm thinking more of connectivity between Oxford or Cambridge and the North West, for example Manchester. Before the Varsity line closed the main route from Oxford or Cambridge to the North West was via Bletchley.

As has been said many times before, a stop on HS2 anywhere between Euston and Birmingham Interchange needs all trains to stop, or alternatively fewer trains in the system. The former will cost 7-8 minutes on the journey time (quite significant in the scheme of things), the latter means a reduction in capacity. Both will make the business case for HS2 worse -and considerably so.

This is a very strong argument for not stopping, how does it work at, for example, Lille Flandres?

 

[zwk500]

Before the Varsity line closed the main route from Oxford or Cambridge to the North West was via Bletchley.

Quite a lot has changed on the network since then. EWR is not about rebuilding what was lost, but about building a suitable railway for future need.

 

[Bald Rick]

This is a very strong argument for not stopping, how does it work at, for example, Lille Flandres?

Presume you mean Lille Europe, as Lille Flandres is a terminus. At the former, there’s rarely more than 4 trains an hour in each direction.

 

[johnnychips]

Lille Flandres is a dead-end terminus, I think. Do you mean Lille Europe?

EDIT: Snap!

 

[train_lover]

If you go onto the EWR website it repeatedly talks about freight from the West Midlands to Felixstowe. So there must be a connection planned for services mentioned above

 

[jfowkes]

If you go onto the EWR website it repeatedly talks about freight from the West Midlands to Felixstowe. So there must be a connection planned for services mentioned above

I'm pretty sure there's nothing that could be called a "plan" for a north facing chord at Bletchley (or Bedford).

The EWR website is (quite reasonably) designed to drum up support for EWR so they'll put anything on that might be a benefit arising from the project, even if it's just aspirational. This is how anti-EWR campaigners are able to warn about non-stop 24/7 freight despite there being no infrastructure or capacity for that. Because it's in some promotional literature.

 

[train_lover]

I'm pretty sure there's nothing that could be called a "plan" for a north facing chord at Bletchley (or Bedford).

The EWR website is (quite reasonably) designed to drum up support for EWR so they'll put anything on that might be a benefit arising from the project, even if it's just aspirational. This is how anti-EWR campaigners are able to warn about non-stop 24/7 freight despite there being no infrastructure or capacity for that. Because it's in some promotional litera

See I was thinking about the possibility of a north bound connection at Oxford with intermodal services heading to Felixstowe via Banbury. It would make sense for freight to use the route as it's another source of revenue for the route.

 

[zwk500]

See I was thinking about the possibility of a north bound connection at Oxford with intermodal services heading to Felixstowe via Banbury. It would make sense for freight to use the route as it's another source of revenue for the route.

It wouldn't make sense for EWR to stuff their line up with freight trains and prevent the passenger services from growing. There are no loops planned on EWR, nor does the route via Banbury have much spare space for additional freight.
It's been mentioned on other threads that the Bletchley north curve has had some preliminary work done on it but ive got no idea how far or what conclusion was reached.

 

[train_lover]

It wouldn't make sense for EWR to stuff their line up with freight trains and prevent the passenger services from growing. There are no loops planned on EWR, nor does the route via Banbury have much spare space for additional freight.
It's been mentioned on other threads that the Bletchley north curve has had some preliminary work done on it but ive got no idea how far or what conclusion was reached.

You say stuff it with freight. There's going to be bags of paths available for additional services including freight. Whilst I do agree with what you say about future growth but as with everything on the railway now it's about money. The Investors in this project will want to see a return in their investment and you can be sure that passenger services won't be enough alone. Freight can offer additional revenue for the route from day one without having to wait years for passenger growth.

 

[Magdalia]

Quite a lot has changed on the network since then. EWR is not about rebuilding what was lost, but about building a suitable railway for future need.

Absolutely, but good connectivity between the Oxford/Cambridge arc and the North is more important now than it was then, and the current need is not being met adequately.

And apologies for muddling the stations at Lille!

 

[zwk500]

Absolutely, but good connectivity between the Oxford/Cambridge arc and the North is more important now than it was then, and the current need is not being met adequately.

Connectivity between Oxford and the North will be better served by getting trains to Birmingham and changing, and connectivity between Cambridge and the North will probably be quicker to get a train into London and then HS2. Connectivity between MKC and the North is pretty good given the service to Manchester Birmingham and Crewe.

 

[stuu]

I This is a very strong argument for not stopping, how does it work at, for example, Lille Flandres?

Lille (Europe) and other intermediate stations work because the lines have much less frequent service. Hs2 is planning on running the highest frequency of any high speed line globally

 

[train_lover]

Lille (Europe) and other intermediate stations work because the lines have much less frequent service. Hs2 is planning on running the highest frequency of any high speed line globally

The frequency is high at the moment but you can bet that will be slashed before the line opens

 

[William3000]

Connectivity between Oxford and the North will be better served by getting trains to Birmingham and changing, and connectivity between Cambridge and the North will probably be quicker to get a train into London and then HS2. Connectivity between MKC and the North is pretty good given the service to Manchester Birmingham and Crewe.

One of the main aims of East West rail is to reduce the need for people to travel on congested (I appreciate Covid has changed this a bit) into London. Travelling in a v shape - with those in Cambridge etc travelling 95 kilometre south to then travel 300km north to Manchester seems absurd to me. I do that journey regularly and I would always try to avoid London if possible - I tend to go via Peterborough and Leeds/Doncaster.

 

[Watershed]

Indeed, and hardly anyone uses them.

As has been said many times before, a stop on HS2 anywhere between Euston and Birmingham Interchange needs all trains to stop, or alternatively fewer trains in the system. The former will cost 7-8 minutes on the journey time (quite significant in the scheme of things), the latter means a reduction in capacity. Both will make the business case for HS2 worse -and considerably so.

When the plan for HS2 was 17tph including the Eastern Leg, I could see the logic in that argument. But with the Eastern Leg now effectively scrapped, does that not release sufficient capacity to allow some trains to stop at a Calvert Interchange?

If the argument is that the Eastern Leg may still be built in full at some point, there is a significant opportunity cost in preserving the ability to run those paths.

A Calvert Interchange is probably still difficult to justify given the inconvenience and time lost due to having to change trains mid-route - and the cost of increased journey times on any HS2 trains that do stop - but I don't think it would really be fair to rule it out completely now that the circumstances have changed.

You say stuff it with freight. There's going to be bags of paths available for additional services including freight. Whilst I do agree with what you say about future growth but as with everything on the railway now it's about money. The Investors in this project will want to see a return in their investment and you can be sure that passenger services won't be enough alone. Freight can offer additional revenue for the route from day one without having to wait years for passenger growth.

Freight will no more appear in droves on day 1 than passengers will! It will be a gradual ramp up either way.

Freight hardly pays its way from the Treasury's short-term perspective. The track access charges only just cover the wear and tear etc. they cause. Whilst there are significant societal benefits to freight going by rail, the Treasury doesn't really care about that.

In terms of paths, in particular the section between Bedford and Bletchley will be quite constrained if the local stations aren't closed or given a skeleton service. So it's by no means guaranteed that there will be plenty of freight paths available.

 

[The Planner]

You say stuff it with freight. There's going to be bags of paths available for additional services including freight. Whilst I do agree with what you say about future growth but as with everything on the railway now it's about money. The Investors in this project will want to see a return in their investment and you can be sure that passenger services won't be enough alone. Freight can offer additional revenue for the route from day one without having to wait years for passenger growth.

There will be plenty of capacity on E-W yes, but you look at it as a whole, not just that bit. It doesn't mean you will get them on and off E-W easily. Oxford is likely to be a pig, which is why Oxford North is often looked at. You will likely see Southampton to the North and vice versa using it from day one as it avoids Leamington to Coventry, Coventry itself and the West Mids. It will also allow extra maintenance time between Oxford and the West Mids as you get next to nothing now unless its disruptive.

 

[zwk500]

You say stuff it with freight. There's going to be bags of paths available for additional services including freight. Whilst I do agree with what you say about future growth but as with everything on the railway now it's about money. The Investors in this project will want to see a return in their investment and you can be sure that passenger services won't be enough alone. Freight can offer additional revenue for the route from day one without having to wait years for passenger growth.

With nowhere to hold trains at Bletchley or Oxford you've got to be able to hit your gap at Oxford North Jn or Denbigh Hall South Jn without blocking the following train. Gaps at Denbigh Hall South Jn have to line up with a path all the way through to Northampton, as well.

One of the main aims of East West rail is to reduce the need for people to travel on congested (I appreciate Covid has changed this a bit) into London.

No, the main aims of EWR are to avoid extra housing development putting more pressure on the key roads (A43/A421/A428).

Travelling in a v shape - with those in Cambridge etc travelling 95 kilometre south to then travel 300km north to Manchester seems absurd to me. I do that journey regularly and I would always try to avoid London if possible - I tend to go via Peterborough and Leeds/Doncaster.

Absurd it may seem, but if it's faster/cheaper people won't care how mad it looks on a map. I travel MK-York regularly. It is usually about even on journey time for me to go MK-Manchester-York, MK-Birmingham-York, and Wolverton-Euston-KGX-York once you add in the layover for changes. As the journey time is comparable between them, I buy my tickets based on a combination of price and departure/arrival time. Usually via London ends up being cheaper as there are more advances available on LNER than on XC or TPE.

May I ask how many people are regularly doing that journey with you? If it's preferable to go to Peterborough and Leeds today I don't see how EWR would really change that, especially after the Transpennine upgrades are completed (in whatever form they take).

 

[Gathursty]

It's slightly off thread but I've never understood why EMR don't stop all Intercity services at Bedford given it is at the end of the Thameslink route.

 

[tspaul26]

It's slightly off thread but I've never understood why EMR don't stop all Intercity services at Bedford given it is at the end of the Thameslink route.

Journey times, pathing and platform availability

 

[Nottingham59]

I've never understood why EMR don't stop all Intercity services at Bedford

.... and because all their evening peak trains from St Pancras would fill up with commuters to Bedford rather than selling peak tickets for longer journeys. It's the same reason that Virgin / Avanti avoid stopping at Milton Keynes,

 

[Class 170101]

In terms of Milton Keynes Central over Bletchley as we stand today West Coast services would never stop at Bletchley, however post HS2 why not? Most of today's West Coast (Avanti) services will be on HS2 thus allowing the space for more links so the future operation would see more semi-fast services on the Fast Lines so why not call at both Bletchley and Milton Keynes. Remember that Class 222s used to call at either Luton or Luton Airport Parkway before the Class 360s arrived, now the Class 360s call at both stations on the fast lines. So why not a similar calling pattern on the West Coast fast lines?

In respect of HS2 and the MML the main centres will be Bedford, Wellingborough, Kettering and Leicester by then because it should be quicker to do London to Derby / Nottingham via HS2 rather than the MML and if it isn't why are we HS2B Eastern Version 2 (to East Midlands Parkway) nevermind Version 1 which was to Sheffield / Leeds and York.

 

[zwk500]

In terms of Milton Keynes Central over Bletchley as we stand today West Coast services would never stop at Bletchley, however post HS2 why not? Most of today's West Coast (Avanti) services will be on HS2 thus allowing the space for more links so the future operation would see more semi-fast services on the Fast Lines so why not call at both Bletchley and Milton Keynes. Remember that Class 222s used to call at either Luton or Luton Airport Parkway before the Class 360s arrived, now the Class 360s call at both stations on the fast lines. So why not a similar calling pattern on the West Coast fast lines?

It's possible for some, but a stop at Bletchley as well will cost 8-10 mins against the 4-5 mins of stopping at just MKC. I can't remember the exact post-HS2 + EWR timetables, but I think there will be enough on the slow lines that stopping trains twice on the fast lines won't be worth it. Today there's already 2tph Ledburn crossers and the 2tph MK terminators (which are quite close behind each other so are more 1tph + relief).

In respect of HS2 and the MML the main centres will be Bedford, Wellingborough, Kettering and Leicester by then because it should be quicker to do London to Derby / Nottingham via HS2 rather than the MML and if it isn't why are we HS2B Eastern Version 2 (to East Midlands Parkway) nevermind Version 1 which was to Sheffield / Leeds and York.

Bedford doesn't look that far north. It's a London commuter town. Kettering and Leicester are the main centres, and Kettering only because it's a junction of road and rail. But Leicester-Nottingham/Sheffield/Derby is a flow that will still need to be served. The MML will change, but HS2 to East mids Pkway is a long way off.

 

[rower40]

There's the race: which will happen first - HS2 to EM Parkway or EWR from Bedford to Cambridge?

To give a glimpse of how east-west journeys can be a nightmare; For one trip I made from Derby to Cambridge, I "beat" the normal route (via Melton Mowbray and March) by:
EMR (or its predecessor) from Derby to Luton
cycling from Luton to Hitchin
Hitchin to Cambridge by local EMU.

 

[Bald Rick]

It's slightly off thread but I've never understood why EMR don't stop all Intercity services at Bedford given it is at the end of the Thameslink route.

Journey times, pathing and platform availability

.... and because all their evening peak trains from St Pancras would fill up with commuters to Bedford rather than selling peak tickets for longer journeys. It's the same reason that Virgin / Avanti avoid stopping at Milton Keynes,

… and because there is little demand for it.

In terms of Milton Keynes Central over Bletchley as we stand today West Coast services would never stop at Bletchley, however post HS2 why not?

because the market will be rather small.

Remember that Class 222s used to call at either Luton or Luton Airport Parkway before the Class 360s arrived, now the Class 360s call at both stations on the fast lines. So why not a similar calling pattern on the West Coast fast lines?

Luton Airport Parkway is a substantial (and lucrative) market. Bletchley isn’t, and won’t be even after EWR.

There's the race: which will happen first - HS2 to EM Parkway or EWR from Bedford to Cambridge?

my money is on HS2 To EM.

 

[Class 170101]

There's the race: which will happen first - HS2 to EM Parkway or EWR from Bedford to Cambridge?

EWR between Bedford and Cambridge, HS2 to EM Parkway will be either changed by the next election (2024) and another review or by Bo Jo getting thrown out and so project cancelled by his Right Wing Tory Successors some of who think he is too left wing.

 

[train_lover]

Freight will no more appear in droves on day 1 than passengers will! It will be a gradual ramp up either way.

Freight hardly pays its way from the Treasury's short-term perspective. The track access charges only just cover the wear and tear etc. they cause. Whilst there are significant societal benefits to freight going by rail, the Treasury doesn't really care about that.

In terms of paths, in particular the section between Bedford and Bletchley will be quite constrained if the local stations aren't closed or given a skeleton service. So it's by no means guaranteed that there will be plenty of freight paths available.

I have to disagree with everything you've raised here. Firstly freight could in theory fill the majority of paths from day one where as passengers services would have to build up over a number of years. Felixstowe to the Midlands services via Peterborough are becoming more and more busier and pathing is a nightmare. This is going to become even more of a challenge over the coming years as intermodal is currently booming so a new route would instantly become a magnetic for the various FOCs that work in and out of Felixstowe.

As for your points about the treasury not caring I'd have to strongly disagree with this. Covid highlighted the importance of Railfreight. Freight was given priority over passenger services which was a welcomed change. Also with TOCs running a skeleton service FOCs were the mainstream of access charges for NR. As we see the sector grow so will the amount it pays into the NR purse. It's a substantial amount and something I'm sure NR will be thankful about.

There will be plenty of capacity on E-W yes, but you look at it as a whole, not just that bit. It doesn't mean you will get them on and off E-W easily. Oxford is likely to be a pig, which is why Oxford North is often looked at. You will likely see Southampton to the North and vice versa using it from day one as it avoids Leamington to Coventry, Coventry itself and the West Mids. It will also allow extra maintenance time between Oxford and the West Mids as you get next to nothing now unless its disruptive.

I agree it's something that needs to be looked at. I'm unsure if Oxford will get a northbound curve onto EWR but it's something that needs to be looked at.

The Midlands has 2 major terminals opening with a third planned. These terminals will each put an additional 16 intermodal services onto the network each day. The majority of which will need to go to Felixstowe or Southampton

 

[Watershed]

I have to disagree with everything you've raised here. Firstly freight could in theory fill the majority of paths from day one where as passengers services would have to build up over a number of years.

And passenger services could just as well fill the graph from day 1. They won't be fully loaded, of course, but a significant proportion will be brand new traffic to the railway.

The freight will largely be existing flows that are rerouted. So just a more operationally convenient way of serving the same markets.

More to the point, whilst there are certainly significant benefits to rail freight, it simply doesn't pay its way from the Treasury's perspective, so there's no way they would sign off on building a new line just for the benefit of freight.

Felixstowe to the Midlands services via Peterborough are becoming more and more busier and pathing is a nightmare.

Pathing is a nightmare but the biggest issues are on things like the Felixstowe branch. Getting across the Midlands isn't the biggest part of the problem.

As for your points about the treasury not caring I'd have to strongly disagree with this. Covid highlighted the importance of Railfreight. Freight was given priority over passenger services which was a welcomed change.

None of this is remotely an indication that the Treasury cares. There were fewer passenger services so freight simply took advantage of that. Rail freight only makes up a tiny percentage of overall freight transport in this country, and frankly if there wasn't ever another freight train, life would just go on. There would simply be more trucks on the road.

Also with TOCs running a skeleton service FOCs were the mainstream of access charges for NR

This is categorically false. TOCs pay massive fixed track access charges. Those didn't diminish as a result of operating fewer services. The only bit that did were the variable track access charges, but they are small change in the grand scheme of things.

Either way, money from TOCs to Network Rail is and has always been wooden dollars. The government always has been, and always will be, the ones ultimately paying for it either way.

As we see the sector grow so will the amount it pays into the NR purse. It's a substantial amount and something I'm sure NR will be thankful about.

NR will of course be happy with additional traffic, but again, the charges are purely there to compensate for the costs caused by operating trains. NR isn't meant to make a 'profit' out of it.

 

[The Planner]

I agree it's something that needs to be looked at. I'm unsure if Oxford will get a northbound curve onto EWR but it's something that needs to be looked at.

The Midlands has 2 major terminals opening with a third planned. These terminals will each put an additional 16 intermodal services onto the network each day. The majority of which will need to go to Felixstowe or Southampton

Oxford won't be getting a curve, it doesnt even register on a fag packet. As for the new Midlands terminals, I am assuming Four Ashes is one (timetable work done on that already), Cannock has never even got off the ground even though paths are in the system, what are the other two? Hinckley and Ardley? Again, both have had timetable work done.

 

[Bald Rick]

As for your points about the treasury not caring I'd have to strongly disagree with this. Covid highlighted the importance of Railfreight. Freight was given priority over passenger services which was a welcomed change. Also with TOCs running a skeleton service FOCs were the mainstream of access charges for NR. As we see the sector grow so will the amount it pays into the NR purse. It's a substantial amount and something I'm sure NR will be thankful about.

As said above, the Treasury is ambivalent at best, as the access charges from running freight services cover the marginal costs, and nothing more. And it isn’t a substantial amount of money (Conrad to passenger access charges).

Freight was not given priority over passenger services either. Passenger services weren’t there, freight filled a few gaps. That’s quite different.

Also with TOCs running a skeleton service FOCs were the mainstream of access charges for NR.

They absolutely were not. Passenger access charge income far, far exceeds freight, even through covid.

 

[train_lover]

Oxford won't be getting a curve, it doesnt even register on a fag packet. As for the new Midlands terminals, I am assuming Four Ashes is one (timetable work done on that already), Cannock has never even got off the ground even though paths are in the system, what are the other two? Hinckley and Ardley? Again, both have had timetable work done.

The 3 terminals are Four Ashes, Hinkley and Northampton Gateway. As you know each terminal are planned to have 16 trains a day with the bulk heading for Felixstowe and Southampton on what is already very busy track. This is why I'm absolutely sure we'll see EWR having regular freight.