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

[Verulamius]

Section A of the consultation is considering the options for Oxford to Bicester, including the London Road level crossing conundrum.

In Oxford itself there is quite a bit:

Our proposals

We propose the following measures to increase capacity on the railway and at the station:
• Providing additional platforms to increase the number of trains that can use Oxford station at the same time
• The additional platforms will also enable some services to continue through Oxford to terminate elsewhere, rather than having to change direction to ‘turn back’ the other way (see below), thereby freeing up capacity at the station
• New infrastructure south of Oxford station to provide improved ‘turn back’ facilities (an area where trains can stand while the driver changes end to turn back for the return journey) outside of the station, freeing up platform space
• Station specific improvements to accommodate the increase in passengers generated by EWR.

On the approaches to Oxford station the options being considered could include:

• Additional tracks between Oxford North Junction and the bay platforms of Oxford station
• Additional track between Oxford North Junction and the Jericho line. This wouldn’t involve redoubling the track all the way from Oxford North Junction to the station.

Our considerations

We are considering the following as we continue to develop our plans in this area:
• The effects on residents living in properties next to the railway, such as noise and disturbance
• The potential need to purchase neighbouring properties
• Protecting the historic London North Western Railway swing bridge and its setting
• The proximity to Port Meadow Special Area of Conservation
• Minimising the impact on current train services during construction
• How to maximise the benefits the Project can bring to communities in Oxford and the surrounding area.

 

[swt_passenger]

Section A of the consultation is considering the options for Oxford to Bicester, including the London Road level crossing conundrum.

In Oxford itself there is quite a bit:

Our proposals

We propose the following measures to increase capacity on the railway and at the station:
• Providing additional platforms to increase the number of trains that can use Oxford station at the same time
• The additional platforms will also enable some services to continue through Oxford to terminate elsewhere, rather than having to change direction to ‘turn back’ the other way (see below), thereby freeing up capacity at the station
• New infrastructure south of Oxford station to provide improved ‘turn back’ facilities (an area where trains can stand while the driver changes end to turn back for the return journey) outside of the station, freeing up platform space
• Station specific improvements to accommodate the increase in passengers generated by EWR.

On the approaches to Oxford station the options being considered could include:

• Additional tracks between Oxford North Junction and the bay platforms of Oxford station
• Additional track between Oxford North Junction and the Jericho line. This wouldn’t involve redoubling the track all the way from Oxford North Junction to the station.

Our considerations

We are considering the following as we continue to develop our plans in this area:
• The effects on residents living in properties next to the railway, such as noise and disturbance
• The potential need to purchase neighbouring properties
• Protecting the historic London North Western Railway swing bridge and its setting
• The proximity to Port Meadow Special Area of Conservation
• Minimising the impact on current train services during construction
• How to maximise the benefits the Project can bring to communities in Oxford and the surrounding area.

This was also posted and discussed a few pages back, around about #4919 etc. Easy to miss as new posts come thick and fast, no criticism intended. Perhaps the idea of EWR is to overwhelm the public with detail this time, noting many of the Cambridge end objections basically start with suggesting there’s been no previous consultations...

 

[Brissle Girl]

HS2 are designing and constructing the track bed for an Up and a Down line to the east of where the original great central line ran, including all bridges and culverts. There will be a ~900m-long bat mitigation structure at Sheephouse Wood which spans both HS2 and EWR

It is currently proposed to only provide a single line on the "Up" alignment with provision to install a Down line - therefore no need to do anything at AVP yet. However, as the Planner has said, the future installation of the railway systems is currently paused.

With a length of around 11-12m (?), and presumably a nice new formation offering decent line-speeds, an hourly service (or even at a push, a half-hourly service) would be perfectly possible with only a single line?

 

[The Planner]

Swt-p Thanks for the link. No. Not off topic. Milton Keynes to London via Aylesbury Prince Risborough and High Wycombe, very much part of the original plan, and MK to AYL still part of of it. Difficult for me to clearly interpret the drawings. But it looks like the waste gantries and unloading yards have shifted from the west to the east side of both HS2 and EWR. The only rail access to the site appears to be from the south. So loco runs round in the yard and departs in same direction as it arrived. They could top and tail if the wanted to use EWR. Seems clear that EWR link from Claydon to Aylesbury will be single tracked

With a length of around 11-12m (?), and presumably a nice new formation offering decent line-speeds, an hourly service (or even at a push, a half-hourly service) would be perfectly possible with only a single line?

Yep, you can do hourly with whats proposed.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Civ Eng Jim, Thanks very much for the Line Diagram. Makes things very clear. 40mph chord line speed, same as Gavray Junction. Also looks like a spur going into the HS2 depot for EWR and the Aylesbury line.

 

[Andyjs247]

Further progress today at Bicester with 66556 in attendance on a ballast train on the newly laid Up Bletchley. Track has been extended almost up to the former Charbridge Lane level crossing on the Eastern perimeter road. Local signage suggests the road will remain diverted until December when the new replacement bridge is presumably due to open.

 

[Roast Veg]

Yep, you can do hourly with whats proposed.

So if I have this right - day 1 will see no Aylesbury Vale services onto EWR, but 1tph is perfectly possible with no infratructure changes?

 

[zwk500]

So if I have this right - day 1 will see no Aylesbury Vale services onto EWR, but 1tph is perfectly possible with no infratructure changes?

Yes, at this stage - which is why the Aylesbury MP and Council (and the sizeable group of people who live in Aylesbury and work in MK) are trying to make sure those making the decisions on train service hear their case loud and clear.

 

[Roast Veg]

I don't doubt it! At least they stand a chance to get a service in.

 

[Neen Sollars]

Take your point, run and hourly Aylesbury to MK on existing stretch to north of Quainton, then new metals to Bletchley, calling at Winslow, Bletchley and MKC. No platform on main line at AVP. Slow line speed AYL to Claydon Junction?

 

[swt_passenger]

Take your point, run and hourly Aylesbury to MK on existing stretch to north of Quainton, then new metals to Bletchley, calling at Winslow, Bletchley and MKC. No platform on main line at AVP. Slow line speed AYL to Claydon Junction?

I think from previous posts in this discussion the biggest problem is fitting them in between Bletchley and Milton Keynes?

 

[richieb1971]

Got my EWR pack today in the mail. Haven't read it yet.

Does anyone know why in the Bedford section EWR are going between Clapham and Brickhill? It seems to be really close to homes, destroying a few in the process. A bit north of there, there is nothing but fields. An extra mile does not seem that much hindrance to keep the peace. Personally I am absolutely 100% for this railway, but it seems just a tad destructive on the current plan when you consider there is quite a few miles of fields just north of the current eastern curve in the consultation. The folks i've spoken to are just concerned its a really busy area already with industrial buildings going up (Brewery), a roundabout junction which is heavily used and now a railway going supposedly right under all of that.

 

[tspaul26]

Does anyone know why in the Bedford section EWR are going between Clapham and Brickhill? It seems to be really close to homes, destroying a few in the process. A bit north of there, there is nothing but fields. An extra mile does not seem that much hindrance to keep the peace. Personally I am absolutely 100% for this railway, but it seems just a tad destructive on the current plan when you consider there is quite a few miles of fields just north of the current eastern curve in the consultation.

Assuming that you are suggesting running the thing between Clapham and Milton Ernest, that would increase route length by several miles.

It’s also not really that much further from homes on the southwest and west sides of Clapham - indeed, you probably pass closer to more in total.

You’d have a very tight curve to head back in the Cambridge direction i.e. the Midland Mainline is heading northwest (ish) and you’d need to turn to face east.

There are also quite a few constraints in the ‘gap’, especially areas of woodland which would be very difficult to avoid.

 

[fishwomp]

Visited the overbridge immediately west of Claydon Jct area again today - was there 11 November.

Looking West from the overbridge:

Then: November 7 2020	Now: April 17 2021
Looking West - the cone in the trackbed may be fixed point of reference (and the bridge).	Massively cleared embankment by April.
Looking East in November	Same scence in April - the dive-under for HS2 clearly progressing!

Finally - zooming in on the dive-under progress - Claydon Jct visible in the background

 

[Trainee9]

Bletchley Viaduct works: 18 April: In the last week preparation has continued for what one assumes will be the big effort over the May bank holiday when beams are put on top of the'box'. Pier 30 has now been re-instated with shell blocks, and parts of the 'box' walls and piers 29 and 28 have temporary work platforms attached.
More interestingly, parts of the block walls have cap blocks installed - presumably the concrete beams will go on top of them. See my image:
There is also a drone video taken on the 17th, which shows the cross beams waiting to be placed on the box. The video is blurry, but there seems to be work at the site of Pier 26, previously demolished.

 

[swt_passenger]

Nice set of photos in this Twitter post showing the vast area of concrete beams for the covered way:

https://twitter.com/Marshrail/status/1379506127466074114/photo/1

 

[Tobbes]

Nice set of photos in this Twitter post showing the vast area of concrete beams for the covered way:

https://twitter.com/Marshrail/status/1379506127466074114/photo/1

Thanks - when are they being installed?

 

[swt_passenger]

Thanks - when are they being installed?

Early May bank holiday weekend I think, but don’t quote me. (Is that NR week 5 of the year?). Euston to Milton Keynes is closed for 3 days Sat-Mon anyway...

 

[snowball]

Thanks - when are they being installed?

#5145 speculates May Day bank holiday.

However I think we know from a previous post that there will be two separate batches. First some beams go in between the current temporary T-shaped OLE supports, then the wires are restrung from those beams, then the temporary supports are removed, then the remaining beams go in.

 

[Tobbes]

Many thanks!

 

[The Planner]

Early May bank holiday weekend I think, but don’t quote me. (Is that NR week 5 of the year?). Euston to Milton Keynes is closed for 3 days Sat-Mon anyway...

Yes, there will be some work on late May too.

 

[Kingham West]

Visited the overbridge immediately west of Claydon Jct area again today - was there 11 November.

Looking West from the overbridge:

Then: November 7 2020	Now: April 17 2021
View attachment 94569	View attachment 94570
Looking West - the cone in the trackbed may be fixed point of reference (and the bridge).	Massively cleared embankment by April.
View attachment 94575	View attachment 94572
Looking East in November	Same scence in April - the dive-under for HS2 clearly progressing!

Finally - zooming in on the dive-under progress - Claydon Jct visible in the background

View attachment 94576

I flew along line yesterday(sat) , progress is fantastic , after waiting 30 yrs .
Work is starting at Greathouse wood .
Bletchley looks like it’s on target .

 

[hwl]

#5145 speculates May Day bank holiday.

However I think we know from a previous post that there will be two separate batches. First some beams go in between the current temporary T-shaped OLE supports, then the wires are restrung from those beams, then the temporary supports are removed, then the remaining beams go in.

Given the gaps between beams need to be closed up, contiguous installation and starting in the middle and working outwards would make sense (aligns with the 2 cranes and their positioning too).
Given nothing is running two of the pairs of TTCs in the middle can be removed initially. This would then allow ~25beams to go in, then the first sets of new OHLE registration equipment needs fitting to the underside of the first beams, this would then allow the final 3 pairs of TTC to be removed and the rest of the beams done.

 

[Class 170101]

Protests over East West Rail’s route into Cambridge | Railnews | Today's news for Tomorrow's railway

www.railnews.co.uk

Protests over East West Rail’s route into Cambridge

PROPOSALS to take a southerly route for East West Rail from Cambourne into Cambridge have sparked opposition from campaigners, who are calling for a judicial review.

Complete with comment at the bottom of the article that the new route should have used the old one to Sandy then via ECML to Hitchin and then the Hitchin to Cambridge line. Not that there is any room for more trains there. ​

 

[Steve Harris]

Complete with comment at the bottom of the article that the new route should have used the old one to Sandy then via ECML to Hitchin and then the Hitchin to Cambridge line. Not that there is any room for more trains there. ​

That was what was originally being touted as the propsed route by the press many many years ago (probably over a decade tbh).

No doubt someone dragged out an old press cutting and hasn't realised everyone and everything has moved on !

 

[tspaul26]

the new route should have used the old one to Sandy

Might be a tad difficult given the fact that a significant number of houses and a school have been built on it...still, no need to let reality intrude on ‘the story’

then via ECML to Hitchin and then the Hitchin to Cambridge line.

This was actually considered a few years ago and ruled out, in large part due to the capacity issues mentioned

 

[Steve Harris]

Might be a tad difficult given the fact that a significant number of houses and a school have been built on it...

Considering the EWR Co IS consulting on Compulsory Purchasing a number of properties in Bedford to make room for the extra EWR tracks through the station there's going to be a significant number of people affected.

Perhaps the real story here, is...

Old track beds shouldn't be sold off !!!

 

[tspaul26]

Considering the EWR Co IS consulting on Compulsory Purchasing a number of properties in Bedford to make room for the extra EWR tracks through the station there's going to be a significant number of people affected.

Perhaps the real story here, is...

Old track beds shouldn't be sold off !!!

However, the likelihood of obtaining powers of compulsory acquisition over those properties in Sandy would be somewhere between vanishing and nil.

The potential property acquisition in Bedford is not for the station works: it’s to increase capacity on the Midland Mainline further north. Very different from a consenting perspective.

 

[Steve Harris]

The potential property acquisition in Bedford is not for the station works: it’s to increase capacity on the Midland Mainline further north. Very different from a consenting perspective.

I have a close friend who's family friend owns a house which is listed as being "at risk" in the EWR Consultation, which has nothing to do with MML capacity further north, but has everything to do with providing capacity for EWR while not reducing MML capacity.
Which is something completely different to what your saying!

From what I hear from them (my friend) EWR is causing a right stink in the Poets Estate in Bedford through their proposals of CP etc.

So much so, they have rung me 4 times in a week asking me various questions etc. (As they know I'm "into trains").

 

[mwmbwls]

I have a close friend who's family friend owns a house which is listed as being "at risk" in the EWR Consultation, which has nothing to do with MML capacity further north, but has everything to do with providing capacity for EWR while not reducing MML capacity.
Which is something completely different to what your saying!

From what I hear from them (my friend) EWR is causing a right stink in the Poets Estate in Bedford through their proposals of CP etc.

So much so, they have rung me 4 times in a week asking me various questions etc. (As they know I'm "into trains").

I hope that you have advised your friends to apply for the hard copies of the consultation document published by EWR which has finer resolution diagrams than the online diagrams. These are available at2021 Consultation Documents - East West Railway Consultations (apsmos.com) Advise them not to be confused by the term "Shopping Basket" - the documents are free. I would advise asking for as a minimum the "Consultation Report -Bedford" and the "Consultation Technical Report". In case of difficulty with the web site contact www.eastwestrail.co.uk/feedback or call 0330 134 0067.