East West RailLink proposed works in Hertford

[Aictos]

Some options of the proposed East West Rail Link involve reopening a route between Hertford East railway station and Hertford North railway station.

Options also propose building a chord near Rye House railway station to allow rail traffic to head north on the West Anglia Main Line towards Stansted Airport.

Will a route between the two Hertford stations ever come to light?

How about the proposed chord at Rye House?

As much as I like my station, the NXEA station at Hertford East looks even more impressive but in the future would we really see a new Hertford Central being built taking trains from both Liverpool Street and Kings Cross/Moorgate to other destinations replacing both existing stations at a new location in Hertford?

This new station being built with 2 island platforms taking 12 cars to allow for the extra capacity allowing though trains to use all platforms with 2 bay platforms for the terminators also being built.

Think of how Gordon Hill looks but then think of how Peterborough looks with 2 bays at the south end instead of just one.

With 4 to 5 booking office windows being available during the week being reduced to 2 or 3 at the weekend.

Plus a increase in platform staff with a supervisor and 3 staff under them.

Oh yeah, a multi story car park replacing the two former sites and a new yard as well to stable stock say about the size of Welwyn Carriage Sidings if not bigger by adding 4 more sidings which should be enough to take the extra traffic.

This would cost money but the traffic using the new station would far outweight any loss by operating two stations.

With a possible target of nearly 2 million using the station and growing....

 

[philjo]

It sounds like a good plan. Is there a suitable route to link the lines together & still provide a through station in Hertford, or would tunnelling under Hertford be needed? Presumably if built for through east-west running, the existing FCC services would have to reverse to continue to Stevenage (unless they are diverted to Stanstead etc & the East-west & existing Liverpool Street services take over the Hertford-Stevenage bit.

It would provde some useful diversionary routes for when the existing lines are closed - e.g. Cambridge-KX could run via Bishop's Stortford & Hertford & also Stanstead-Hertford-KX instead of Liverpool Street (The latter route could possibly become part of the Thameslink Services by extending semi-fast Hertford services to Stanstead via Bishop's Stortford & give through Stanstead-St Pancras-Gatwick connections
You can also access Liverpool Street (& Stratford) from Stevenage via Hertford

 

[Aictos]

It sounds like a good plan. Is there a suitable route to link the lines together & still provide a through station in Hertford, or would tunnelling under Hertford be needed? Presumably if built for through east-west running, the existing FCC services would have to reverse to continue to Stevenage (unless they are diverted to Stanstead etc & the East-west & existing Liverpool Street services take over the Hertford-Stevenage bit.

It would provde some useful diversionary routes for when the existing lines are closed - e.g. Cambridge-KX could run via Bishop's Stortford & Hertford & also Stanstead-Hertford-KX instead of Liverpool Street (The latter route could possibly become part of the Thameslink Services by extending semi-fast Hertford services to Stanstead via Bishop's Stortford & give through Stanstead-St Pancras-Gatwick connections
You can also access Liverpool Street (& Stratford) from Stevenage via Hertford

Well most of the route is still there but some of it is no longer available ie there's a bit of the old trackbed at the front of Hertford North with a great big mobile phone transmitter on it!

The best thing seriously for Hertford to have is to have a new station built just north of Molewood Tunnel as the space is there using the materials from the old stations to built the new one.

I suppose with major work both stations could undergo remodelling but to futureproof Hertford, I just think a new station would be good for everyone.

 

[A0]

It sounds like a good plan. Is there a suitable route to link the lines together & still provide a through station in Hertford, or would tunnelling under Hertford be needed? Presumably if built for through east-west running, the existing FCC services would have to reverse to continue to Stevenage (unless they are diverted to Stanstead etc & the East-west & existing Liverpool Street services take over the Hertford-Stevenage bit.

It would provde some useful diversionary routes for when the existing lines are closed - e.g. Cambridge-KX could run via Bishop's Stortford & Hertford & also Stanstead-Hertford-KX instead of Liverpool Street (The latter route could possibly become part of the Thameslink Services by extending semi-fast Hertford services to Stanstead via Bishop's Stortford & give through Stanstead-St Pancras-Gatwick connections
You can also access Liverpool Street (& Stratford) from Stevenage via Hertford

Quite alot of the route through Hertford has actually been built on now - it was closed a long time ago, pre Beeching in fact along with the rest of the route back to Welwyn Gdn City.

In terms of providing a 'useful' diversion route - you are having a laugh aren't you? The ECML is close to capacity between Hitchin and KX already - mainly because of the Welwyn 2 track, but don't forget the Hertford loop is twin track, not four track, and I don't think there's space to add more capacity on there.

In terms of a suggested link using Thameslink to join Stansted to Gatwick - firstly, Thameslink capacity will be a problem there, and secondly, why? What purpose would it serve? The only reason Luton and Gatwick are linked is because they are 'en route' between Bedford and Brighton (which was the original TL plan). Not sure why running Stansted services from KX is worthwhile either - they wouldn't be serving anywhere which would generate much traffic en-route (Finsbury Pk, Alexandra Palace, Hertford loop stations). And for people coming into Stansted, if they want to go north on the ECML it's far easier to go to Peterborough and head north from there.

The biggest problem overall though is: "Some options of the proposed East West Rail Link" actually make little sense. Rather than seeking to reuse redundant trackbeds, they are proposing building on Green Belt - between Stevenage and Luton. And the services which are being proposed make little sense. It would be far better if they concentrated on getting the Oxford - Cambridge link up and running which could be done now using existing routes virtually all of which have spare capacity (Bicester, Bletchley, Bedford, Corby, Peterborough, March, Cambridge) rather than conjuring up hare-brained schemes to spend alot of money digging up the green belt.

 

[Aictos]

Green Party response to East Coast Main Line Route Utilisation Strategy Consultation

Well you really ought to see what the Green Party are proposing for the Hertford Loop!

Some of it is really good and should be done ie loops at Cuffley and Watton At Stone not to mention converting the existing layout at Gordon Hill so Platform 1 becomes a though line and Platform 4 comes back into use as a though line too.

Not too sure on how they would convert platform 3 at Hertford to a though line as it would need as minimum I would guess a new bridge to cater for it then join the down line just past the bridge.

HOWEVER, if they did go ahead and got the bridge replaced then they could quite easily extend all the platforms northbound or just platforms 2 and 3 northbound as platform 1 could be extended southbound as there's nothing stopping it like the trackwork will at the south end of platforms 2 and 3.

Thus enabling Hertford to cater for 8 car services - we can take 8 cars but it needs SDO to be working as we can take no longer then 7 cars maximum on the platform at a squeeze, then half of the 8th coach could get into the platform.

Anyway, I can't see much reason why the majority of the stations on the line can't be extended to take 8 cars, the only issue at Hertford is platforms 2 and 3 where the bridge and south end track layout is concerned.

Most of the platforms are straight with the exception of platforms 2 and 3 at you guess it Sunny Hertford.

 

[O L Leigh]

It's pie in the sky.

The former alignment through the town is partially built on with houses and businesses along stretches of the trackbed, bridges removed and some sections converted to roads. In any case it completely misses Hertford East station and appears to join the Eastern line at some point beyond the signalbox. A north chord at Rye House is similarly impractical due to the built-up nature of the location together with the river and the hills behind.

Besides, as others have said, why bother...? It would be one hell of a diversionary route and add ages to any journey. Even if the lines could be built to meet an actual need, there are operational issues that would be hard to overcome, including pathing and route knowledge to name but two. It doesn't even form any meaningful East-West connection, just ties together two parallel North-South routes.

No, this one is right from the top drawer of wishful thinking.

O L Leigh

 

[A0]

In many respects, Hertfordshire didn't lose very much in the post-war closures and in reality the lines which did close would probably struggle to justify reopening now:

- Welwyn - Hertford, closed in the 1950s, now built on in Hertford, probably insufficient demand to justify reopening.

- Hatfield - St Albans, again closed in the 1950s, formation built on through Hatfield. Again, there probably isn't the demand to reopen, particularly given the stations at either end are outside the town centres so not very convenient.

- Welwyn - Luton. Built on in Wheathampstead, A1M in the way, might have been a possible if part of a full route through Dunstable and onto Leighton Buzzard, but that isn't going to happen.

- Buntingford branch - highly unlikely to reopen. Buntingford isn't big enough to warrant reinstatement.

- Harpenden - Hemel - built on in Hemel and Redbourn. Not enough demand to warrant reopening. In Hemel's case, the station is miles out of the town centre.

- Watford - Rickmansworth - this one will happen in a form as part of linking the Met to Watford Junction.

- Hitchin - Bedford - this would make sense to use as part of the east-west route if they can't use Bedford - Sandy. It was originally 2 track throughout and the formation is present.

- Bishops Stortford - Braintree - part in use for Stansted, and it might make sense to extend back to Braintree.

To my mind, it would be far better to concentrate on the 'quick wins' which could easily be delivered - as above Oxford - Cambridge, using largely existing routes or improving links in areas where growth can now justify it, rather than just presenting flights of fancy all the time.

The biggest irony is this government turned down a private proposal to rebuild the GC mainline to Leicester and Woodhead link onto Manchester which didn't ask for any public money - merely support in the planning process, but that imbecile Darling turned it down - what a prat. Fitting he's now chancellor and making a hash of that too.

 

[jon0844]

A link from Hitchin to Bedford would seem like a good idea to join the GN and TL branches, offering a decent backup if one line is ever affected - as well as solving issues like going from Cambridge or Peterborough to Luton or Bedford via London, or relying on buses.

It would also be nice for the Alban Way to be reinstated - most of it being intact so not too much compulsory repurchasing, but realistically it won't happen because there are many buses serving Hatfield and St Albans. A wiser and cheaper move might be to widen the roads where there are bottlenecks, although that would also involve knocking down properties and highly unlikely to happen.

Likewise, linking the GN lines to the EA lines also makes sense - but you have buses there too - and it's not actually THAT far to walk if you're willing and able.

 

[johnb]

The biggest irony is this government turned down a private proposal to rebuild the GC mainline to Leicester and Woodhead link onto Manchester which didn't ask for any public money - merely support in the planning process, but that imbecile Darling turned it down - what a prat. Fitting he's now chancellor and making a hash of that too.

Turned down because, in practice, when 'private' projects on that scale go bust they require government funding to sort them out. And they frequently do go bust - see: CTRL. And the original GC!

Had the GC plan been approved, they'd have run out of funds in 2007-09 as cheap money ran out, requiring billions in government bailout money, and hence forcing the cancellation of more important infrastructure projects like Crossrail, electrification, East West rail, etc.

 

[Ngatcha]

I could see an new chord being built near Rye House for direct trains to Stanstead Airport. This will happen after the Hertfordshire rail link is completed by joining Hertford East with Rickmansworth.

Traffic on the M25 is increasing and eventually it will eventually only be quicker to travel by train across the east Buckinghamshire, Hertfordshire and west Essex M25 corridoor

Rickmansworth to Croxley - existing track.

Croxley to Watford High Street - Croxley rail link will eventually be built when there is too much traffic in St Albans Rd and Rickmansworth Rd in Watford

Watford High Street to St Albans Abbey - existing track. Will eventually need to be twinned (adjacent factories can be relocated certain areas near house the track will remain single - this has been proven to work on the Croydon Tramlink). St Albans Abbey have to close to the public and then turned into a depot.

Park Street to St Albans City -twin track along North Orbital Road avoiding golf course and unnecceary building demolitions.

Existing Midland Mainline will be used with a stop at St Albans City.

North of St Albans City Construction of twin tracks on the fields to link to the Welwyn Garden City track having a stop here. Just north of Welwyn North construction will need to take place along the fields to the Hertford North line. Just north of Hertford North Station twin boreholes will need to be built for underground platforms and then twin bore holes to Hertford East where underground platforms will need to be built under the existing station. The overground platforms can be used as a depot.

The land adjacent to the existing track is enough for the rake of the boreholes which will rejoin the existing track.

 

[John Webb]

....... St Albans Abbey have to close to the public and then turned into a depot.

Park Street to St Albans City -twin track along North Orbital Road avoiding golf course and unnecceary building demolitions.....

St Albans Abbey is too far up the hill above the station for such a function and in any case is needed for other uses.

Park Street to St Albans - reuse the old link from the Abbey branch across what was once an airfield to the Midland Mainline at Napsbury with a new station at the latter - both as a 'Park and Ride' off the A414 North Orbital and M25 and to serve the country's biggest 'village' of London Colney.

But of course the Abbey branch is to become 'light rail' ......

 

[Trog]

Watford High Street to St Albans Abbey - existing track. Will eventually need to be twinned (adjacent factories can be relocated certain areas near house the track will remain single - this has been proven to work on the Croydon Tramlink). St Albans Abbey have to close to the public and then turned into a depot.

More likely the branch from Watford Junction to St Albans Abby will close to rail and become a tramway.

A connection from Watford High Street to the Abbey branch would be a nightmare to build due to the differences in level, and the need to cross the WCML. It would have a be a tunnel deep enough to go under the WCML and Orphanage Road in one go. Then you have to build the approach cuttings without demolishing half of Watford. The existing rail route between the two branches would involve crossing the WCML on the level, reversing twice in the process on the DF and US.

 

[O L Leigh]

What a wonderfully fanciful concept. It's clearly barking mad to attempt anything of that nature, but well done for having a go.

O L Leigh

 

[vtiman]

Lets convert the metropolitan line branch that goes from Rickmansworth to Watford central into a tram line and join this to the Croxley Green line to Watford Junction. This would be much cheaper then either extending the met or reopening Croxley Green. The line could then cross the WCML on a suitably strengthened A412 St Albans Road roadbridge and then run along the St Albans Abbey line.

From there it is a short distance up St Peters street to the town centre and not too far from City station. Then onto the Hatfield Business park, The Galleria and university, Hatfield and Welwyn Garden ?

and what about welwyn garden - hertford east - hertford north - rye house ???
And literally by extension a tram line across Hertfordshire from Watford to Rye House which would relieve the a414 and connect into the three major north south heavy rail lines to London and the North !

 

[jon0844]

A link between the WCML, MML, ECML and whatever the East Anglia line is called (plus a link between the ECML and Hertford Loop) would be extremely good for a number of reasons.

It's already kind of linked with a myriad of buses that run at times not linked in any way to the operation of the railway (any link is purely coincidental), and in times of disruption a regular link (train or tram) would be a godsend for the railway. It would give a series of possible 'diversions' for passengers, and of course have benefits for all the towns and places inbetween.

 

[John Webb]

....... The line could then cross the WCML on a suitably strengthened A412 St Albans Road roadbridge and then run along the St Albans Abbey line.

From there it is a short distance up St Peters street to the town centre and not too far from City station. Then onto the Hatfield Business park, The Galleria and university, Hatfield and Welwyn Garden ?........

I do agree with you that more East/West interlinking connections are needed.

Your above suggestion was raised by others earlier in the year in connection with the conversion of the 'Abbey Flyer' line into a tramway. It would be impracticable to run a tram through central St Albans due to the steepness of Holywell Hill which leads up into the city centre and the narrowness of the city centre roads. It would be more sensible to reuse the St Albans Abbey/Hatfield route, although there is a modern housing estate across the trackbed near the former London Road station which would cause problems - it might be just possible to come up from that route soon after passing under the Midland main line to get to the East side of the City Station to make the connection.

(I speak as a St Albans resident who'd love to see a dedicated link between the two stations in St Albans.)

 

[jon0844]

The Alban Way was I presume just a single track, and has lost some bridges along the way - but the amount of compulsory purchasing required would be relatively low, unless it would be widened.

I'm sure it would have strong resistance locally though given that it is now a walk/cycle path - but if widened it could be still be open as a cycle route (but not as wide as it is now in most parts).

To be honest, I can't see it happening even though it would be a great idea, especially with a spur up to St Albans City.

 

[LE Greys]

In many respects, Hertfordshire didn't lose very much in the post-war closures and in reality the lines which did close would probably struggle to justify reopening now:

• - Welwyn - Hertford, closed in the 1950s, now built on in Hertford, probably insufficient demand to justify reopening.

• 
  
  Agree there. I've been along the old trackbed, and it looks decidedly unlikely.
  
  

  [*]- Hatfield - St Albans, again closed in the 1950s, formation built on through Hatfield. Again, there probably isn't the demand to reopen, particularly given the stations at either end are outside the town centres so not very convenient.

  
  It might be possible to do an end-on with the St Alban's Abbey branch, possibly by diverting it through St Alban's City (there used to be a connecting spur). Question is, would a Watford-St Alban's-Hatfield line be any use to anyone?
  
  

  [*]- Welwyn - Luton. Built on in Wheathampstead, A1M in the way, might have been a possible if part of a full route through Dunstable and onto Leighton Buzzard, but that isn't going to happen.

  
  Useful for Luton Airport perhaps, but unlikely.
  
  

  [*]- Buntingford branch - highly unlikely to reopen. Buntingford isn't big enough to warrant reinstatement.
  
  [*]- Harpenden - Hemel - built on in Hemel and Redbourn. Not enough demand to warrant reopening. In Hemel's case, the station is miles out of the town centre.

  
  Agreed.
  
  

  [*]- Watford - Rickmansworth - this one will happen in a form as part of linking the Met to Watford Junction.
  
  [*]- Hitchin - Bedford - this would make sense to use as part of the east-west route if they can't use Bedford - Sandy. It was originally 2 track throughout and the formation is present.

  
  The new flyover at Hitchin would make it easier to get to the Cambridge branch, and a bay at the north end of Hitchin (difficult because of the bridge over Nightingale Road) would be the best place to reverse. Also possibly useful for some weekend diversions of MML services, provided there is capacity south of Hitchin to get them to King's Cross.
  
  

  [*]- Bishops Stortford - Braintree - part in use for Stansted, and it might make sense to extend back to Braintree.

  
  Once again, a useful through-route, in this case for an extension of the Birmingham-Stansted service down into Essex. The East-West route could go through here as well, creating almost a perfect London Orbital, except for the section between Southend and Sheerness (maybe a ferry).
  

To my mind, it would be far better to concentrate on the 'quick wins' which could easily be delivered - as above Oxford - Cambridge, using largely existing routes or improving links in areas where growth can now justify it, rather than just presenting flights of fancy all the time.

The biggest irony is this government turned down a private proposal to rebuild the GC mainline to Leicester and Woodhead link onto Manchester which didn't ask for any public money - merely support in the planning process, but that imbecile Darling turned it down - what a prat. Fitting he's now chancellor and making a hash of that too.

You're a bit behind the times, Shadow Chancellor (thank God! ).

 

[Lee_Again]

I think I once read about Stevenage > Luton. I guess south out of Stevenage, head West about Langley Junction (where the Hertford Branch joins), across the hills to Luton Airport (missing the inclines and villiages) and then on to Luton.

Would probably generate plenty of traffic, not least to the airport. The East/West roads are not great between the A1 and M1 corridors.

 

[jon0844]

You would have to rebuild all of it, not just bits, for it to be really useful and justifiable.

 

[O L Leigh]

- Bishops Stortford - Braintree - part in use for Stansted, and it might make sense to extend back to Braintree.

Once again, a useful through-route, in this case for an extension of the Birmingham-Stansted service down into Essex. The East-West route could go through here as well, creating almost a perfect London Orbital, except for the section between Southend and Sheerness (maybe a ferry).

Except that the Airport Branch does not follow the alignment of the former route. In fact, it goes nowhere near it and to create a cross-route through to Braintree would require a completely new alignment from Stansted Airport to Dunmow.

In any case, while much of the existing trackbed has been preserved as the Flitch Way footpath some parts have been obliterated, notably where the trackbed passes under the M11 and again at Dunmow where the old A120 bypass (now the B1256) follows a section of trackbed and occupies the station site.

O L Leigh

 

[causton]

Anyone doubts the need for a St Albans - Hatfield train line hasn't seen the fact that 13 buses an hour Mon - Fri go along that stretch of road and most of the time they're not exactly empty!

 

[LE Greys]

Except that the Airport Branch does not follow the alignment of the former route. In fact, it goes nowhere near it and to create a cross-route through to Braintree would require a completely new alignment from Stansted Airport to Dunmow.

In any case, while much of the existing trackbed has been preserved as the Flitch Way footpath some parts have been obliterated, notably where the trackbed passes under the M11 and again at Dunmow where the old A120 bypass (now the B1256) follows a section of trackbed and occupies the station site.

O L Leigh

True, but that's not insurmountable. It's unlikely that the route would loop back towards Takeley, so going around the north-east end of the airport car park, then east of Bamber's Green and following the A120 towards Dunmow would be most likely. Dunmow itself presents a problem, since the old A120 is practically on top of the trackbed (as you said). Something has to move, and the only solution I can see is to shift the line south a little, then lower the A130 to go under it. From there on, the trackbed looks clear.

As for footpaths and cycleways, I'll be a bit more frank than normal. A railway is an essential part of the national infrastructure, used by hundreds of people for journeys necessary for their lives (working, shopping and general travel). A footpath or cycleway is a leisure facility used by a few people, almost none of whom are commuting to work or travelling long distances. Which is more useful to the general community?

Besides, if you buy up a strip of land in the field next to the line, you can still have your footpath, just moved a little.

 

[Trog]

How about diverting the Abbey Branch onto the link line formation between How Wood and the site of Napsbury Station. Crossing the DF, UF and DS of the MML and comming down off a flyover into the 6' between the Up and Dn Slow so that moves off the branch do not conflict with any other road. The trains then to running to St Albans city, where they could use the existing siding to reverse.


Further north come off the slow side of the MML just south of the site of Chiltern Green station, and follow the LNER branch through Luton and Dunstable using the existing bridge at Chiltern Green to pass under the MML. There are if I remember a few shop units over the formation just north of Luton Hoo station, but being businesses they will probably be happy to move if they are suitably paid. The line through Dunstable would need reinstating but at least the council have recently cleared all the vegetation off for their misguided busway. Once over the A5 I think there is an existing cutting that can be followed down to the new Dunstable - Leighton road. The old railway is I think on a bit of a bank here so this could be raised to give clearence then the railway could follow the road to the south side of the Linslade end of Leighton Buzzard. Curving in to meet the WCML over the field and allotments between the old sand pit and the first houses. There is a fifth formation from the middle of the row of houses up to Leighton Buzzard station, which could probably be extended without trimming the gardens of the southern most houses, if the bottom of the bank was supported by a low retaining wall.

 

[jon0844]

Anyone doubts the need for a St Albans - Hatfield train line hasn't seen the fact that 13 buses an hour Mon - Fri go along that stretch of road and most of the time they're not exactly empty!

I totally agree, and given I live in Hatfield and quite regularly drive (or take a bus) to St Albans, I would LOVE to see the reinstatement of the Alban Way - but the point is, unless it goes on in either direction, I just cannot see how it would ever be justified (my vote, and yours, probably wouldn't have the Government sitting up and taking much notice). Also, the buses (Uno in particular as they carry students from different campuses and Uni sites) are busy at certain times but for the rest, the buses are sometimes completely empty (I've been the only one on a bus from St Albans to Hatfield before).

When Elaine Holt was at FCC, they were even looking into allowing season ticket holders from Hatfield or St Albans to get dual-availability seasons to use either station, which would have meant I'd have gone to St Albans even more often (when I worked at Farringdon). A nice link would have been great.

At the moment, it is a nice vision with no funding or completion date. However, it could be turned into something that will serve more people and, while more expensive, would be more likely to happen. That's only my opinion though.

As an alternative, they could simply fix a number of pinch points on the road between the two stations. While the bus has a pretty free and unhindered journey from Smallford to Hatfield station (and beyond), the bit before St Albans City station does create unnecessary delays. Not that there seems to be a lot that could be done, without narrowing pavements or buying up property.

 

[John Webb]

The Alban Way was I presume just a single track, and has lost some bridges along the way - but the amount of compulsory purchasing required would be relatively low, unless it would be widened......

Overbridges lost at two locations in St Albans, but I think all the underbridges remain intact to keep the walkers and cyclists separated from the roads. The biggest drawback in reinstating this route to Hatfield is the severence of the route by the southern approach to the A1(M) tunnel and some development on the trackbed in the Roe Green area of Hatfield. But with the wider and more level roads through Hatfield than St Albans perhaps trams on roadway running would be possible.

 

[causton]

But with the wider and more level roads through Hatfield than St Albans perhaps trams on roadway running would be possible.

Indeed, and even if the road isn't suitable Cavendish Way has wide verges which could be turned into tram lines as well, along with 2 parallel roads both separated only by hedges and a footpath which could be utilised! And maybe the pointless dual carriageway with one lane in each direction could have one carriageway turned into the tram line... then there's room almost all the way to Hatfield station. (I'm thinking this too much aren't I? :P )

 

[A0]

Agree there. I've been along the old trackbed, and it looks decidedly unlikely.



It might be possible to do an end-on with the St Alban's Abbey branch, possibly by diverting it through St Alban's City (there used to be a connecting spur). Question is, would a Watford-St Alban's-Hatfield line be any use to anyone?



Useful for Luton Airport perhaps, but unlikely.



Agreed.



The new flyover at Hitchin would make it easier to get to the Cambridge branch, and a bay at the north end of Hitchin (difficult because of the bridge over Nightingale Road) would be the best place to reverse. Also possibly useful for some weekend diversions of MML services, provided there is capacity south of Hitchin to get them to King's Cross.



Once again, a useful through-route, in this case for an extension of the Birmingham-Stansted service down into Essex. The East-West route could go through here as well, creating almost a perfect London Orbital, except for the section between Southend and Sheerness (maybe a ferry).



You're a bit behind the times, Shadow Chancellor (thank God! ).

My original post was in Aug 2009 - when 'not now' Darling was Chancellor, so not behind the times. However, I do agree, at least he's not any longer.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

How about diverting the Abbey Branch onto the link line formation between How Wood and the site of Napsbury Station. Crossing the DF, UF and DS of the MML and comming down off a flyover into the 6' between the Up and Dn Slow so that moves off the branch do not conflict with any other road. The trains then to running to St Albans city, where they could use the existing siding to reverse.


Further north come off the slow side of the MML just south of the site of Chiltern Green station, and follow the LNER branch through Luton and Dunstable using the existing bridge at Chiltern Green to pass under the MML. There are if I remember a few shop units over the formation just north of Luton Hoo station, but being businesses they will probably be happy to move if they are suitably paid. The line through Dunstable would need reinstating but at least the council have recently cleared all the vegetation off for their misguided busway. Once over the A5 I think there is an existing cutting that can be followed down to the new Dunstable - Leighton road. The old railway is I think on a bit of a bank here so this could be raised to give clearence then the railway could follow the road to the south side of the Linslade end of Leighton Buzzard. Curving in to meet the WCML over the field and allotments between the old sand pit and the first houses. There is a fifth formation from the middle of the row of houses up to Leighton Buzzard station, which could probably be extended without trimming the gardens of the southern most houses, if the bottom of the bank was supported by a low retaining wall.

I thought St Albans City was pretty much at capacity (as with most of the MML south of Bedford).

In terms of the old Luton - Dunstable line you're way off the mark. There's at least one bridge gone in Luton, the whole of Luton Bute St station area has been redeveloped with University buildings and car-parking covering the site.

In Dunstable itself the formation beyond the A5 has gone - with office buildings (I think Sth Beds Council) in the way.

The simple fact is that the Welwyn - Dunstable - Leighton Buzzard line has gone and won't be coming back.

A far better plan would be to get Bedford - Sandy re-instated which would allow an ECML - Oxford link which would probably be sufficient for any likely traffic.