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

[Bletchleyite]

In a sensible world the sections so far would have been electrified as they were upgraded and the (all new) Bedford-Cambridge section would be electric on day 1.

Yeah, build it electrified, much easier than closing it. And a good start would be wiring the Marston Vale and extending the platforms to 4-car now while it's quiet, then it could be run with a 319 or 350 and the 230s consigned to razor blades.

 

[jopsuk]

Yeah, build it electrified, much easier than closing it. And a good start would be wiring the Marston Vale and extending the platforms to 4-car now while it's quiet, then it could be run with a 319 or 350 and the 230s consigned to razor blades.

we do not, however, live in a sensible world

 

[The Planner]

This forum would have wet itself if Oxford Bicester had been wired when built without a single EMU using it for years.

 

[RT4038]

we do not, however, live in a sensible world

Except that it would not be sensible to pay £millions to extend platforms at halts on the Marston Vale line that produce very few passengers, and should have been closed long ago.

I am still very suspicious that running through trains from Bedford to Oxford is somehow going to increase the passenger numbers on the Bedford-Bletchley basket case section to justify electrification, additional frequency, platform extensions etc etc. Consequently, I see holding off from doing these things as being very sensible and prudent.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Except that it would not be sensible to pay £millions to extend platforms at halts on the Marston Vale line that produce very few passengers, and should have been closed long ago.

Certainly closure of some of them would be an option, though not all (and it's not always obvious; Ridgmont for instance is in the middle of a field, but just over the road is the Amazon warehouse which has lots of low-paid people working there, some of whom will rely on it). However, removing DMU islands (particularly ones involving particularly unreliable DMUs) really should be a priority.

 

[cle]

I remember Marston being closed for about a year to upgrade it to 60mph! I don't think it is due any increases on EWR, which is crazy. There could be some lengthenings/upgrading stations, and the odd closure maybe - but a local service might still be viable if it could get up to MKC. Saving the eternal conversation about a curve, the reversals could be possible as the Bletchley platform(s) will have capacity.

But but but... it would be such a perfect time to close the line for six months, do some of the above and electrify too. Then again, nobody had notice of Covid and what a good opportunity for access it might be (saving teams' own distancing).

 

[BrianW]

From p41 of todays' National Infrastructure Strategy:

In 2017, the National Infrastructure Commission outlined the transformational economic potential of the Oxford-Cambridge Arc in its report ‘Partnering for Prosperity’. At Spending Review 2020 the government has reaffirmed its commitment to the area, including additional funding to support the Budget 2020 commitments to develop a Spatial Framework to plan for long-term economic and housing growth and to explore the case for up to four Development Corporations along the route of East West Rail. This will help to deliver sustainable economic and housing growth, supported by infrastructure, that meets the needs of local people.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/938051/NIS_final_print.pdf

There are mentions there too of many rail schemes. Read and dream on?

 

[gallafent]

I am still very suspicious that running through trains from Bedford to Oxford is somehow going to increase the passenger numbers on the Bedford-Bletchley basket case section to justify electrification, additional frequency, platform extensions etc etc. Consequently, I see holding off from doing these things as being very sensible and prudent.

Isn't this a bit of a chicken-and-egg though? Traffic volumes on the A421 (and loadings on the X5) suggest there's an awful lot of people moving along that corridor, so providing a decent rail service between MK (as in Central MK) and Bedford could make a huge difference to passenger numbers, I'd imagine, even before the key link to Cambridge is finally built. Fast Oxford-Bicester-Bletchley-Bedford with a coach link (maybe a vestige of the X5, maybe better just a new link with fewer stops east of Bedford) from Bedford station to Cambridge station would surely also make a big difference. It might even compete with rail via London for the Oxford-Cambridge trip.

To add a bit of data, Google Maps tells me that starting right now (as a random datum) it takes 58min to get from Milton Keynes Central station to Bedford station at the moment, … using the X5, and I depart at 1024 to get there at 1122 (so I arrive 1h8m from now). By rail, changing at Bletchley, it takes 1h23min, departing at 1042 and arriving at 1205 (so I arrive 1h50m from now). If I jump in my car and set off it takes 28m via the A422 and I arrive at 1043. Get the rail journey time down to 45min and you'd take a lot of those X5 passengers, and I'd hope at least some of the A421 (and A422) users, surely. But someone will have been doing these calculations (surely …

(Oh yes, and it's 28.7km by bike, which Google Maps thinks would take 1h30m (sounds about right I guess, much as I'd like to think I could do it quicker , so I'd be quicker by cycling than by taking the train, setting off at 1015! Remaining alive for the duration of the journey might be a big ask though, unless the A422 has a cycle track alongside it, which I doubt. Interesting thought experiment to cost one of those with marble-smooth tarmac, priority at junctions, etc., for maximal cycling speed, vs an upgrade to the Marston Vale line, though).

(Final aside, it's currently only about 30 minutes slower to cycle the 65km from my house in Vale of White Horse to my parents' in Central Bedfordshire, than to take public transport (of course generally I drive, taking an hour, vs 3h at great expense using two buses and two trains (via Coventry!!!) or 3h30m by bike with extra snack costs!) … quite looking forward to the opening of the western section, from that perspective.)

 

[221101 Voyager]

Does anyone know why the Marston Vale will remain at 60mph max? I would have thought they could do say 75 in certain areas.

 

[Bletchleyite]

(Oh yes, and it's 28.7km by bike, which Google Maps thinks would take 1h30m (sounds about right I guess, much as I'd like to think I could do it quicker , so I'd be quicker by cycling than by taking the train, setting off at 1015! Remaining alive for the duration of the journey might be a big ask though, unless the A422 has a cycle track alongside it, which I doubt.

There's no great need, there's a nice route through the villages (Cranfield, Salford etc) or you could ride via Woburn Sands, Ridgmont then the "old 421" which is still there parallel to the dual carriageway, downgraded to "C road" status.

MK to Buckingham is more annoying by bike, there's no sensible route that avoids one or other of the 421/422. As I have a friend who lives there, this is more than a bit annoying.

 

[ashkeba]

MK to Buckingham is more annoying by bike, there's no sensible route that avoids one or other of the 421/422. As I have a friend who lives there, this is more than a bit annoying.

Route 51 to Winslow (when not blocked by EWR) then the cycleway alongside the 413? 23km versus 18km by car is annoying but far from the worst.

Cycleways usually come out with a much better benefit cost ratio than any other transport project. The HS2 cycleway was the most beneficial per pound bit of it, until Cameron's government axed it! I prefer bike-train-bike for long journeys and hope to use EWR for some eventually!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Route 51 to Winslow (when not blocked by EWR) then the cycleway alongside the 413? 23km versus 18km by car is annoying but far from the worst.

A bit far and very hilly so you feel it!

And yes, EWR is being allowed carte blanche to block far too many rural roads and paths for their pure convenience.

 

[RT4038]

Isn't this a bit of a chicken-and-egg though? Traffic volumes on the A421 (and loadings on the X5) suggest there's an awful lot of people moving along that corridor, so providing a decent rail service between MK (as in Central MK) and Bedford could make a huge difference to passenger numbers, I'd imagine, even before the key link to Cambridge is finally built. Fast Oxford-Bicester-Bletchley-Bedford with a coach link (maybe a vestige of the X5, maybe better just a new link with fewer stops east of Bedford) from Bedford station to Cambridge station would surely also make a big difference. It might even compete with rail via London for the Oxford-Cambridge trip.

To add a bit of data, Google Maps tells me that starting right now (as a random datum) it takes 58min to get from Milton Keynes Central station to Bedford station at the moment, … using the X5, and I depart at 1024 to get there at 1122 (so I arrive 1h8m from now). By rail, changing at Bletchley, it takes 1h23min, departing at 1042 and arriving at 1205 (so I arrive 1h50m from now). If I jump in my car and set off it takes 28m via the A422 and I arrive at 1043. Get the rail journey time down to 45min and you'd take a lot of those X5 passengers, and I'd hope at least some of the A421 (and A422) users, surely. But someone will have been doing these calculations (surely …

(Oh yes, and it's 28.7km by bike, which Google Maps thinks would take 1h30m (sounds about right I guess, much as I'd like to think I could do it quicker , so I'd be quicker by cycling than by taking the train, setting off at 1015! Remaining alive for the duration of the journey might be a big ask though, unless the A422 has a cycle track alongside it, which I doubt. Interesting thought experiment to cost one of those with marble-smooth tarmac, priority at junctions, etc., for maximal cycling speed, vs an upgrade to the Marston Vale line, though).

(Final aside, it's currently only about 30 minutes slower to cycle the 65km from my house in Vale of White Horse to my parents' in Central Bedfordshire, than to take public transport (of course generally I drive, taking an hour, vs 3h at great expense using two buses and two trains (via Coventry!!!) or 3h30m by bike with extra snack costs!) … quite looking forward to the opening of the western section, from that perspective.)

The trains currently (pre Covid) have very little of the Bedford-Milton Keynes market, and adding one faster train per hour between Bedford and Bletchley (-Oxford) is hardly going to make a dent in that. Might damage the through bus service between Bedford & Oxford, but not much intermediately.

I expect most of the road traffic on the A421/422 is making a myriad of journeys between Origin and Destination pairs, almost all of which would be inconvenient or virtually impossible by rail, so will not transfer to rail.

Hardly surprising that spending money on electrification, line speed upgrades, longer platforms at Kempston Hardwick, Millbrook etc. is not being proceeded with at this stage!

 

[Tobbes]

The trains currently (pre Covid) have very little of the Bedford-Milton Keynes market, and adding one faster train per hour between Bedford and Bletchley (-Oxford) is hardly going to make a dent in that. Might damage the through bus service between Bedford & Oxford, but not much intermediately.

I expect most of the road traffic on the A421/422 is making a myriad of journeys between Origin and Destination pairs, almost all of which would be inconvenient or virtually impossible by rail, so will not transfer to rail.

Hardly surprising that spending money on electrification, line speed upgrades, longer platforms at Kempston Hardwick, Millbrook etc. is not being proceeded with at this stage!

I'm confused - I thought EWR was supposed to be 100 mph throughout, and that this was a big cost driver on the Marston Vale section?

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm confused - I thought EWR was supposed to be 100 mph throughout, and that this was a big cost driver on the Marston Vale section?

No, from the TWA inspector’s report:
“On the section of route between Bletchley and Bedford (Section 2D), there will be an increase in traffic required by the project from 1 tph (with occasional freight) to 2 tph (plus freight) but no change in the existing line speed.”

 

[Tobbes]

No, from the TWA inspector’s report:
“On the section of route between Bletchley and Bedford (Section 2D), there will be an increase in traffic required by the project from 1 tph (with occasional freight) to 2 tph (plus freight) but no change in the existing line speed.”

Thanka, I'd missed this. Makes Ox-Cam in 90 mins seem unlikely. How feasible is 100 mph Bedford to Bletchley (HL)?

 

[RT4038]

Thanka, I'd missed this. Makes Ox-Cam in 90 mins seem unlikely. How feasible is 100 mph Bedford to Bletchley (HL)?

From Bedford (Midland) to beyond Bedford (St. John's) it would be impossibly expensive due to the curvature. The rest of the line has numerous level crossings, which the mitigation works (of replacement by bridges in many if not all instances), if possible to carry out, would be dubious value for money due to the expense. As has been mentioned on this forum before, a brand new replacement line (approaching MK Central from the north) on a revised alignment would probably offer a better investment (but still costing a lot of money)

 

[Energy]

This forum would have wet itself if Oxford Bicester had been wired when built without a single EMU using it for years.

The rest of Chiltern isn't electrified. Not much point when there are no plans to electrify the rest of the line so diesel trains would have to be used.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The rest of Chiltern isn't electrified. Not much point when there are no plans to electrify the rest of the line so diesel trains would have to be used.

I think the suggestion was to wire it when built so it was ready for EWR.

 

[jfowkes]

The rest of Chiltern isn't electrified. Not much point when there are no plans to electrify the rest of the line so diesel trains would have to be used.

This is why bi-modes are a thing. Electrify one bit, put bi-modes on, keep electrifying and slowly transition from more diesel to more electrons.

 

[D365]

Does anyone know why the Marston Vale will remain at 60mph max? I would have thought they could do say 75 in certain areas.

The Class 230s only do 60mph. Is the speed limit not being increased under EWR?

 

[Energy]

This is why bi-modes are a thing. Electrify one bit, put bi-modes on, keep electrifying and slowly transition from more diesel to more electrons.

Bicester to Oxford isn't that long, and it was done before bi-modes really became a thing.

 

[swt_passenger]

Bicester to Oxford isn't that long, and it was done before bi-modes really became a thing.

...and initially organised and paid for by Chiltern, as part of their Evergreen package of projects. Expecting it to include wiring is weird.

 

[RT4038]

The Class 230s only do 60mph. Is the speed limit not being increased under EWR?

See posts #4305 and #4307

 

[Neen Sollars]

So Oxford to Cambridge journey will include a travel time of approx. 22 mins from Bletchley HL to Bedford? Hope they don`t bump into a 230 on the way.

 

[Mikey C]

So Oxford to Cambridge journey will include a travel time of approx. 22 mins from Bletchley HL to Bedford? Hope they don`t bump into a 230 on the way.

Surely when Bedford to Cambridge is constructed as a brand new 100mph railway, they will do something then with that section?

 

[bspahh]

Surely when Bedford to Cambridge is constructed as a brand new 100mph railway, they will do something then with that section?

explains that there is a specification for the service on the section from Oxford to Bletchley, when it first opens, and also in 35 years time. For the Bicester-Bletchley section, they need pretty much the same specification for both of these. The next slide shows that there would need to be improvements between Bletchley and Bedford for the service in 35 years time.

The slide at 10 minutes 15 says "No journey time specified, but ceiling linespeed of 100mph underpins the business case journey times". Its a 100mph ceiling line speed. They aren't going to get round the corner at Bedford St Johns at 100mph!

 

[Andyjs247]

Bicester to Oxford isn't that long, and it was done before bi-modes really became a thing.

...and initially organised and paid for by Chiltern, as part of their Evergreen package of projects. Expecting it to include wiring is weird.

Why is it weird? Yes Chiltern led on the section between Bicester and Oxford but there was sufficient foresight in that the works for East West Rail, double tracking and sensibly including certain provisions for future electrification were included. It was delivered on time and on budget, showing the advantages of what can done when you don’t have to work around the constraints of a live railway.

Indeed electrification of EWR was promised until it later got descoped. I can remember those animations including APT-like trains at an electrified future Winslow station. What seems weird is continuing with gauge clearance for freight (to W10/W12) but not for electrification between Bicester and Bletchley.

Elsewhere ITV Meridian/Thames Valley news were saying on Wednesday that further funding at a local level is now available for the rebuilding of Oxford station. They showed the overall design that had previously been consulted on and agreed. The rebuilding would include making platform 4 into an island with a new platform 5. It would obviously be beneficial for the expansion in services EWR will bring to Oxford. However I’ve not seen any more details on when the rebuilding is likely to progress.

 

[The Planner]

Why is it weird? Yes Chiltern led on the section between Bicester and Oxford but there was sufficient foresight in that the works for East West Rail, double tracking and sensibly including certain provisions for future electrification were included. It was delivered on time and on budget, showing the advantages of what can done when you don’t have to work around the constraints of a live railway.

Indeed electrification of EWR was promised until it later got descoped. I can remember those animations including APT-like trains at an electrified future Winslow station. What seems weird is continuing with gauge clearance for freight (to W10/W12) but not for electrification between Bicester and Bletchley.

Elsewhere ITV Meridian/Thames Valley news were saying on Wednesday that further funding at a local level is now available for the rebuilding of Oxford station. They showed the overall design that had previously been consulted on and agreed. The rebuilding would include making platform 4 into an island with a new platform 5. It would obviously be beneficial for the expansion in services EWR will bring to Oxford. However I’ve not seen any more details on when the rebuilding is likely to progress.

W10/W12 is an obvious thing to do, far from weird, means we can take a lot more access between Wolvercote and Leamington and not have to divert Intermodals via West London and up the WCML. The only reason it wasn't a live railway was it being temporarily closed to do it. If it wasn't effectively a long siding to Bicester Town with more services that may well not have been possible.

 

[hwl]

W10/W12 is an obvious thing to do, far from weird, means we can take a lot more access between Wolvercote and Leamington and not have to divert Intermodals via West London and up the WCML.

For some intermodals (i.e. going further north) I can see it being more popular than Wolvercote - Leamington (- Coventry - Nuneaton) as it is effectively grade separated at the WCML connections. Southbound advantage slightly more useful than Northbound.
And the best route for So'ton - Daventry as no inner GWML or WCML running.