East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

[Bletchleyite]

The point is, Bedford Midland could become a hub, like Peterborough, where trains from all over call. There would be a good case for most Sheffield and Nottingham trains to call.

Indeed. The whole point is connectivity. We are in the era of the clockface, connectional regional express, not the once-or-twice-a-day crack express. The South East has a good rail service to/from London, but what it doesn't have is the spider's web of interconnecting services that you see in, say, the North, where you can get from anywhere to anywhere quite easily if you can put up with the dross that is Northern. This is about giving the Oxford-Cambridge arc that connectivity. People actually going from Oxford to Cambridge are barely of any practical importance at all.

 

[LLivery]

If we are talking about a new Bedford South then we need to be honest about what happens to Bedford and by extension Wixhams, St Johns and Kempston Hardwick. There is no way that intercity trains are going to stop Luton Airport Parkway> Luton> Bedford South > Bedford. none.

Therefore I suggest a new interchange at "Bedford South" incorporating Wixhams. I would either downgrade Bedford to or close it completely. If we close it we will also need to close St Johns and possibly Kempston Hardwick and divert all trains to "Bedford South".

Personally I would prefer to not have to spend loads of money making services less convenient for existing passengers. I would like E-W to serve the existing Bedford station somehow. If that can be done or can be done in a way acceptable to all stakeholders and funders is debatable.

Precisely.

Indeed. The whole point is connectivity. We are in the era of the clockface, connectional regional express, not the once-or-twice-a-day crack express. The South East has a good rail service to/from London, but what it doesn't have is the spider's web of interconnecting services that you see in, say, the North, where you can get from anywhere to anywhere quite easily if you can put up with the dross that is Northern. This is about giving the Oxford-Cambridge arc that connectivity. People actually going from Oxford to Cambridge are barely of any practical importance at all.

Yes, there's no point talking about connectivity on a corridor if you aren't going to connect places properly. I don't know the Northern network they well, but I'm always surprised by the connectivity - expecting routes to terminate in Manchester and then realising it goes on to elsewhere.

Good stations are essential for town centres and for a change, there's even quite of bit of land for extra platforms at Bedford. The car parks could be replaced with a multistory. It'll be expensive, yes, but it'll be worth it. If you have to wait a little long for the funding, fine.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Good stations are essential for town centres and for a change, there's even quite of bit of land for extra platforms at Bedford. The car parks could be replaced with a multistory. It'll be expensive, yes, but it'll be worth it. If you have to wait a little long for the funding, fine.

Same with MKC. The builders of the original station had a lot of foresight and basically built it with the space for 3 additional full-length platforms - platform 6 was already added on, and on the other side there is a wide car park area and bridge which would, with minor modifications, allow another full-size island platform to be added quite easily.

 

[DarloRich]

and on the other side there is a wide car park area and bridge which would, with minor modifications, allow another full-size island platform to be added quite easily.

A terminating platform perhaps but a through platform would exceed the width of the cutting north of the station

 

[Bletchleyite]

A terminating platform perhaps but a through platform would exceed the width of the cutting north of the station

Which would of course be fine for EWR, particularly as the existing platform 2 which is used for terminating trains could be repurposed to a through platform.

A new island would be more work because the lift would need moving (though there is definitely room for that). A new single platform would be very easy to do because the existing lift position would be fine.

 

[DarloRich]

Which would of course be fine for EWR, particularly as the existing platform 2 which is used for terminating trains could be repurposed to a through platform.

A new island would be more work because the lift would need moving (though there is definitely room for that). A new single platform would be very easy to do because the existing lift position would be fine.

it isnt quite that simple but in theory there is space for a bay platform. In theory.

 

[alexx]

Just a little reminder that the public inquiry into phase 2 starts today in Milton Keynes. It's expected to sit for 40 days over the next 12 weeks, so I'd hope everything would be resolved by summer (maybe over-optimistic?)

 

[A0wen]

But you're forgetting that the X5 (a) is a bus (even though the vehicles are very posh indeed, much nicer than any Class 150, 153 or 230) - some people will simply not use buses - and (b) is very susceptible to traffic congestion - punctuality is absolutely appalling and that 40 minute running time is an unachievable dream in the peaks.

I don't think a north to east curve at Denbigh Hall would be particularly expensive when you look at the costs of the rest of EWR. You'd have to buy up a few industrial units (including the IKEA Full Serve warehouse!), but the lie of the land seems to be such that it would not be a particularly difficult piece of work to do at all. And I reckon if the Marston Vale ran from MKC, even in its current form, demand would be much greater.

I'm not forgetting it at all - but look at other examples where the train only a marginal journey benefit over the coach.

Oxford to London has long been a case in point where the stopping points the coaches rather than people having to get into the city centre station offer mean the journey time penalty isn't as severe - as a result the coaches do quite well.

Perhaps if the curve to Denbigh Hall is so easy, you should join NR and tell them where they're going wrong..... in the meantime I'll happily defer to people like @Bald Rick @DarloRich and a few others who seem to at least understand that an infrastructure change based on drawing a crayon line on a Google Earth map may seem simple, they're often anything but.

 

[DarloRich]

Perhaps if the curve to Denbigh Hall is so easy, you should join NR and tell them where they're going wrong..... in the meantime I'll happily defer to people like @Bald Rick @DarloRich and a few others who seem to at least understand that an infrastructure change based on drawing a crayon line on a Google Earth map may seem simple, they're often anything but.

Posters here constantly underestimate both the cost and difficulty of building new lines. If only it were as simple as knocking down a few industrial units! There would be considerable costs in relocation of both business units ( where are they going to go in MK to allow them to continue trading? How much does a new plot on a new business park cost v a grotty trading estate in Bletchley? ) railway facilities and in civils before we start building/altering track.

In honesty most of the trading estate is going to have to go to deliver a curve and the required earth works to support a curve. You would also be left with a fairly useless and rail-locked triangle of land inside the curve. Anyone on the inside of the curve has to be relocated even if the line doesn't physically impact on them and anyone between Watling Street and the curve is going to have to be compensated so may as well move!

Personally I do not think it delivers enough benefit to be worth the cost, the bad publicity, etc for the return it delvers versus a reversal at Bletchley using the existing infrastructure. While such a curve would be of great personal benefit i do not think my journey to work is a key driver in infrastructure investment! Anyone who remains will need a new road layout to support continued use. It isnt beyond the wit of man but all adds to the cost. As the cost goes up the benefit goes down...........

I think @Bletchleyite is correct a direct service would increase users. I think a reversal at Blethcley offers that service for a fraction of the cost.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think @Bletchleyite is correct a direct service would increase users. I think a reversal at Blethcley offers that service for a fraction of the cost.

A reversal also allows for still serving Bletchley. And it isn't that big a thing with a modern DMU or EMU, it could even be combined with a crew change given that Bletchley is an established crew depot.

 

[DarloRich]

A reversal also allows for still serving Bletchley. And it isn't that big a thing with a modern DMU or EMU, it could even be combined with a crew change given that Bletchley is an established crew depot.

exactly - lets get a direct service running using what we have now rather than hope for some sun lit future! The bigger issue is track capacity between Bletchley and MK and unit reliability

 

[Bletchleyite]

exactly - lets get a direct service running using what we have now rather than hope for some sun lit future! The bigger issue is track capacity between Bletchley and MK and unit reliability

Probably the only downside of the Class 230 is that with their 50mph top speed using them pretty much rules out the direct service. It's a massive shame there is the short platform issue, otherwise it would almost certainly be being run using 2-car 100mph Class 172s from the West Midlands fleet which wouldn't cause this issue - a regular 100mph path is all that would be needed.

 

[A0wen]

Posters here constantly underestimate both the cost and difficulty of building new lines. If only it were as simple as knocking down a few industrial units! There would be considerable costs in relocation of both business units ( where are they going to go in MK to allow them to continue trading? How much does a new plot on a new business park cost v a grotty trading estate in Bletchley? ) railway facilities and in civils before we start building/altering track.

Quite - and it's not like it's a new problem - everyone seems to think such difficulties have only occurred in the last 30 years with a mix of planning regs and 'Elf and Safety. Yet look back to the Victorian times - the network we have today has some of its "oddities" as a result of planning issues, landowners not wanting the railway to traverse their land etc etc.

 

[DarloRich]

It is also worth noting that building a new curve could alienate two of the three peak hours users groups:

• London Commuters
• College kids

 

[mr_jrt]

If we are talking about a new Bedford South then we need to be honest about what happens to Bedford and by extension Wixhams, St Johns and Kempston Hardwick. There is no way that intercity trains are going to stop Luton Airport Parkway> Luton> Bedford South > Bedford. none.

By the same measure I still think that whilst I can see the argument for Luton Airport station when it was built, given passengers will always have to interchange in some form, what difference does it make whether they do so at the Airport or main station? Ideally now there would be a (light?)rail service from Dunstable to the airport via the main station over the old branch. Obviously failing that, even extending the guided bus from Luton to the airport on the same alignment would have made sense. As a final fallback, extending the under-construction light rail back up to the main Luton station would make sense, as you could then restore the intercity stops back to the main Luton station.

 

[DarloRich]

By the same measure I still think that whilst I can see the argument for Luton Airport station when it was built, given passengers will always have to interchange in some form, what difference does it make whether they do so at the Airport or main station? Ideally now there would be a (light?)rail service from Dunstable to the airport via the main station over the old branch. Obviously failing that, even extending the guided bus from Luton to the airport on the same alignment would have made sense. As a final fallback, extending the under-construction light rail back up to the main Luton station would make sense, as you could then restore the intercity stops back to the main Luton station.

Why bother? Just focus the stops where needed. Intercity: Luton Airport > Bedford South. Commuter trains: all stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It is also worth noting that building a new curve could alienate two of the three peak hours users groups:

• London Commuters
• College kids

The latter could be an issue, but I'm not sure the former would be - there are more, faster services from MKC, and the benefit of the 0713 starting at Bletchley is lost from May.

 

[Hughby]

Just a little reminder that the public inquiry into phase 2 starts today in Milton Keynes. It's expected to sit for 40 days over the next 12 weeks, so I'd hope everything would be resolved by summer (maybe over-optimistic?)

40 days? Crikey! Commiserations to anyone who has to sit though that

 

[DarloRich]

The latter could be an issue, but I'm not sure the former would be - there are more, faster services from MKC, and the benefit of the 0713 starting at Bletchley is lost from May.

also more expense and potentially a loss of time.

 

[HowardGWR]

40 days? Crikey! Commiserations to anyone who has to sit though that

Most of them who do will be very well remunerated, so no need for those.

 

[mr_jrt]

Why bother? Just focus the stops where needed. Intercity: Luton Airport > Bedford South. Commuter trains: all stations.

...because ideally you want to serve the centre of a large urban area rather than the outskirts so more people are in the catchment area? How many passengers are going to want to travel from Sheffield and Leicester city centres to the outskirts of either Bedford or Luton? City-centre stops mean you can just walk a lot of the time, or you're a single change to a bus away from your destination. Making people change multiple times really puts them off. Why is HS2 pushing to terminate at Euston rather than OOC? Why is it also having a station at Curzon St. rather than just having an interchange with the WCML at Birmingham International?

 

[route:oxford]

I'm not forgetting it at all - but look at other examples where the train only a marginal journey benefit over the coach.

Oxford to London has long been a case in point where the stopping points the coaches rather than people having to get into the city centre station offer mean the journey time penalty isn't as severe - as a result the coaches do quite well.

Yes and no. The launch of a the Chiltern service has had a significant affect on the coach operators.

Prior to Oxford Parkway opening, the X90 service operated 4 buses an hour to London. Shortly after launch it was quietly cut to a bus every 20 minutes, it has recently been cut to 2 coaches an hour. The Tube still runs 5 buses an hour, but they feel quieter.

The price to park at Oxford Parkway and at Thornhill (for the coaches) is identical. Advance purchases on Chiltern often undercut the coach, with fares from around £5 each way. A Network Card off-peak service matches the coach price.

What I definitely don't do anymore is drive to Haddenham. Whilst it does offer me a quicker door-to-door journey, I refuse to pay three times as much to park as it does at Oxford Parkway and then even the cheapest discounted tickets also cost 3x more than from Oxford Parkway (on the same train!).

 

[Bald Rick]

40 days? Crikey! Commiserations to anyone who has to sit though that

I’d be surprised if it was that quick.

 

[Bald Rick]

...because ideally you want to serve the centre of a large urban area rather than the outskirts so more people are in the catchment area? How many passengers are going to want to travel from Sheffield and Leicester city centres to the outskirts of either Bedford or Luton? City-centre stops mean you can just walk a lot of the time, or you're a single change to a bus away from your destination. Making people change multiple times really puts them off. Why is HS2 pushing to terminate at Euston rather than OOC? Why is it also having a station at Curzon St. rather than just having an interchange with the WCML at Birmingham International?

For Luton, there is a much bigger flow to the airport from ‘up north’ than there is to Luton town.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not forgetting it at all - but look at other examples where the train only a marginal journey benefit over the coach.

Oxford to London has long been a case in point where the stopping points the coaches rather than people having to get into the city centre station offer mean the journey time penalty isn't as severe - as a result the coaches do quite well.

Perhaps if the curve to Denbigh Hall is so easy, you should join NR and tell them where they're going wrong..... in the meantime I'll happily defer to people like @Bald Rick @DarloRich and a few others who seem to at least understand that an infrastructure change based on drawing a crayon line on a Google Earth map may seem simple, they're often anything but.

@DarloRich has said it all nothing for me to add....

...except I go to that IKEA warehouse regularly (most recently this weekend) and had no idea it was so close to the railway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

@DarloRich has said it all nothing for me to add....

...except I go to that IKEA warehouse regularly (most recently this weekend) and had no idea it was so close to the railway.

The railway near enough runs parallel to the old Watling St (the road with the industrial estate along it).

 

[Bald Rick]

The railway near enough runs parallel to the old Watling St (the road with the industrial estate along it).

I’ve looked at the map now and can see. It’s funny how my “taxi-driver” brain has two different maps in it for the same area!

 

[mr_jrt]

For Luton, there is a much bigger flow to the airport from ‘up north’ than there is to Luton town.

Indeed, but they still have to change to a shuttle bus to the airport proper at Luton Airport station (until the DART rail link opens, anyway, then they'll have to change on to that instead). Point is, if you've got to change anyway, why not change at Luton town and give the town centre an intercity service to promote growth? I'd understand if the station was a stone's throw from the airport and you could walk it in a few minutes, but it's an (admittedly short) bus ride away. Had they extended DART to Luton town I doubt the overall travel time from up north would have taken much longer. You're still travelling effectively the same distance, and I doubt they would have had any intermediate stops on it (other than perhaps the old airport station site), so you would be mostly going at line speed.

Luton's a bit of a deprived place, I just feel it could do with a leg up, so to speak.

 

[Bald Rick]

Indeed, but they still have to change to a shuttle bus to the airport proper at Luton Airport station (until the DART rail link opens, anyway, then they'll have to change on to that instead). Point is, if you've got to change anyway, why not change at Luton town and give the town centre an intercity service to promote growth? I'd understand if the station was a stone's throw from the airport and you could walk it in a few minutes, but it's an (admittedly short) bus ride away. Had they extended DART to Luton town I doubt the overall travel time from up north would have taken much longer. You're still travelling effectively the same distance, and I doubt they would have had any intermediate stops on it (other than perhaps the old airport station site), so you would be mostly going at line speed.

Luton's a bit of a deprived place, I just feel it could do with a leg up, so to speak.

But the what would be the point of the airport station then?

The DART is costing £200m for less than a mile and a half, largely over unused land or land it already owned. It’s reasonable to assume that it would cost the same again to get to the town station.

The benefit of calling more long distance services at Luton would be minimal; there really isn’t much of a flow to the East Midlands and north, andnever has been.

 

[Bald Rick]

Double post.