Ely North Junction upgrade proposals

[DynamicSpirit]

It’s not about the quantity of road traffic, but how long the barriers are down for. Currently it is an auto half barrier, which will be down for around a minute per train (longer for freight trains). At a guess, around 15-20 minutes an hour. Because of the extra railtraffic it would have to be full barriers, which means being down 3-4 minutes for each train. With more trains, you’re looking at them being down 50 minutes an hour (again, at a guess). That’s just not tenable.

That kinda leads straight back to my question about the time the barriers would be down for. Why on Earth would you want barriers to be down for 3-4 minutes per train? By my calculations, At 50mph, it should take a 200m long passenger train about 9 seconds to pass the level crossing. 18 seconds for a train going at 25mph (I would assume Southbound trains will be slowing down for Ely station so will be going slower). Freight trains will obviously be longer, but most trains will be passenger ones. There's no reason for the barrier to remain up once the train has gone past, so you seem to be suggesting that the barriers ,might be lowered something like 3 minutes before a train is due to arrive. That seems like an absurdly long time. Wouldn't about 1 minute be ample?

 

[Ianno87]

That kinda leads straight back to my question about the time the barriers would be down for. Why on Earth would you want barriers to be down for 3-4 minutes per train? By my calculations, At 50mph, it should take a 200m long passenger train about 9 seconds to pass the level crossing. 18 seconds for a train going at 25mph (I would assume Southbound trains will be slowing down for Ely station so will be going slower). Freight trains will obviously be longer, but most trains will be passenger ones. There's no reason for the barrier to remain up once the train has gone past, so you seem to be suggesting that the barriers ,might be lowered something like 3 minutes before a train is due to arrive. That seems like an absurdly long time. Wouldn't about 1 minute be ample?

No, because if the crossing goes to full barriers, then that means getting the barriers down in time to keep the approaching train on green signals the whole way. Which means 4 signals away on 4-aspect signalling.

 

[Bald Rick]

so you seem to be suggesting that the barriers ,might be lowered something like 3 minutes before a train is due to arrive. That seems like an absurdly long time. Wouldn't about 1 minute be ample?

Standard procedure.

For controlled crossings the barriers must be down, and the crossing proved clear, in sufficient time for an approaching train to be given clear signals on approach. That means the crossing sequence starting around 1 minute before the driver of an approaching train would see the first cautionary signal, which in this case are around 2 miles away. At 40/50mph that is around 2-3 minutes on top of the minute for the closure sequence.

 

[Class 170101]

Standard procedure.

For controlled crossings the barriers must be down, and the crossing proved clear, in sufficient time for an approaching train to be given clear signals on approach. That means the crossing sequence starting around 1 minute before the driver of an approaching train would see the first cautionary signal, which in this case are around 2 miles away. At 40/50mph that is around 2-3 minutes on top of the minute for the closure sequence.

Is that the same for an MCB-OD?

Also for Kiln Lane do many trains actually achieve 40 / 50mph at that point? Passenger trains are stopping for or pulling away from Ely Station (depending on direction). Most Freight would either be slowing down for Ely Loops or Ely Dock Jn heading towards Bury St Edmunds (20mph?) or accelerating from Ely Loops or Ely Dock Jn again back end has to be clear heading north (20mph?).

 

[bspahh]

Also for Kiln Lane do many trains actually achieve 40 / 50mph at that point? Passenger trains are stopping for or pulling away from Ely Station (depending on direction). Most Freight would either be slowing down for Ely Loops or Ely Dock Jn heading towards Bury St Edmunds (20mph?) or accelerating from Ely Loops or Ely Dock Jn again back end has to be clear heading north (20mph?).

The plan is to allow trains to go at 50mph across the Cutter and Common Muckhill bridges, between Ely station and Kiln Lane. Pages 19 and 21 of the information pack for the consultation

https://phase2.elyareacapacity.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/EACE-Stakeholder-Information-Pack-Round-2-May-2021-FINAL.pdf

say:

The (Cutter) bridge needs to be replaced to carry trains travelling at 50 miles per hour and
more frequent train services
[...]
The (Common Muckhill) bridge needs to be replaced with a stronger bridge that can carry heavy
freight trains and faster, more frequent train services. The new bridge would be
designed to carry trains travelling at 50 miles per hour

 

[Bald Rick]

Is that the same for an MCB-OD?

Yes

Also for Kiln Lane do many trains actually achieve 40 / 50mph at that point?

Yes. Passenger certainly, it’s a mile from Ely station. Freight, not now but they will be by then.

Of course th3 slower the6 are the longer the crossing need# to be down for.

 

[chiltern trev]

The bridges are to be 50mph freight acceptable - does it mean, and has it been stated that all turnouts will also be 50mph freight acceptable so that the braking and accelerating performance is not altered because of passing through a turnout?

Arch bridge or truss bridge for Common Muckhill and Cutter bridges. What is the cost difference? I assume the bridge abutment works will cost the same. The arch looks much nicer.

Given the soft nature of the ground, can you build bridge abutments capable of a 3 track railway and yet only load up part of the abutment width with 2 tracks, i.e. passive provision for third track and arch - or do you get heave/uplift/buoyancy issues with the unloaded section? Or does that mean you have place concrete blocks on the 3rd track abutment to simulate the 3rd track arch?

 

[Bald Rick]

The bridges are to be 50mph freight acceptable - does it mean, and has it been stated that all turnouts will also be 50mph freight acceptable so that the braking and accelerating performance is not altered because of passing through a turnout?

They are all 50 now. You’d expect them to be the same (or very close to it). Given that almost all the freight is to/from the March direction, that will be the priority for speed if any decisions have to be made.

 

[chiltern trev]

They are all 50 now. You’d expect them to be the same (or very close to it). Given that almost all the freight is to/from the March direction, that will be the priority for speed if any decisions have to be made.

Thanks.

I am not very familiar with turnout speeds, but can you advise are there standard 'off the shelf' turnouts and for a few common speeds?

And what might the cost of a standard 50mph turnout be compared to a slow speed turnout, say 20mph (Carlisle South approach is full of them)

 

[trebor79]

Raises serious design and operational control issues that are well outside accepted safe standards. Even if it were possible a more formal access would still be required to the land.

I can think of a 'light' bridge, built in the 1950's?, over the Norwich-Sheringham/Yarmouth/Lowestoft at Cremorne Lane which gave light vehicular access to the former Gas Works site (I worked there for a time). No formal pedestrian use and no public access either. There was always the adjacent private level crossing for heavy access.
Anyone got an example of a more recent 'light' vehicle/pedestrian shared bridge over rail? And how is that use controlled?

There was one south of Attleborough on the Breckland Line, near Snetterton race track. 3te weight limit, though I saw that ignored on many occasions. It was a bit of a ramshackle thing, the carriageway walls were of corrugated iron, no idea what the underside was like.
It was closed about 2 years ago and has only relatively recently reopened. It's been replaced by what I can only describe as a miniature motorway bridge. There is now no weight limit, although it appears to rest upon at least part of the original abutments.

 

[Bald Rick]

I am not very familiar with turnout speeds, but can you advise are there standard 'off the shelf' turnouts and for a few common speeds?

Yes there are standard designs for all speeds of turnout. To add t9 the fun there are also non-standard designs, where standard designs don’t fit.

And what might the cost of a standard 50mph turnout be compared to a slow speed turnout, say 20mph (Carlisle South approach is full of them)

Good question. The cost of a turnout varies by a number of factors. I’ll do the simple version:

The cost of the turnout itself - materials and installation - is typically related to the length of the unit. Longer turnouts need more material, but also more digging out of the old stuff on installation so takes more effort. The length of the turnout is related to speed: faster = longer; substantially so once you go above 50mph. Turnout lengths will also vary depending on curvature of the ‘straight’ route and some other factors.

BUT -if you are having to renew the track because it is all life expired, it is likely that the adjacent plain lien is also life expired, so it needs digging up anyway. Therefore in some cases installing longer / faster turnouts actually doesn’t cost much extra.

However....

If it was just track it would be easy. It isn’t. There is also signalling, electrification, and often geography in the way. Using Ely as the example, the Junction used to be double in all directions, but it also used to be about 20mph for most of them. In the 1990s remodelling, prioritising the line to Peterboro’, and making the others single lead allowed the speed to be increased within the available railway land (I know the chap who designed it). It simply wasn’t (and still isn’t) possible to have double junctions and high speed. That’s why the current proposal for improving the Junction will need land take.

Just to go back to signalling, if you replace a 20mph turnout with a 50 mph version, the extra length will mean changes to the signalling system. As a minimum it means changes to train detection (track circuits or axle counters), and more often than not signals have to move. It is also quite likely that doing this in a complex area (such as the Carlisle South example you mentioned) would have a knock on to other parts of the layout which means more work, and potentially changing the interlocking. And that’s means you are effectively resignalling. And with a big change, that also means complete replacement of the electrification in the area too (if it has electrification, of course). So the costs very quickly add up.

To put some very rough numbers on it - renewing one simple 20mph crossover like for like would cost about £2m; putting in a 50mph crossover would be about £2.5m-£3m if it didn’t need any changes to signalling or electrification, but if it did it could easily be £5m+.

 

[Meerkat]

To put some very rough numbers on it - renewing one simple 20mph crossover like for like would cost about £2m; putting in a 50mph crossover would be about £2.5m-£3m if it didn’t need any changes to signalling or electrification, but if it did it could easily be £5m+.

To an outsider that sounds mentally expensive, what’s the very rough breakdown of that £2m cost? Even if you just said 50% materials, 30% labour and machine hire, 20% blockade cost sort of thing….

 

[Bald Rick]

To an outsider that sounds mentally expensive, what’s the very rough breakdown of that £2m cost? Even if you just said 50% materials, 30% labour and machine hire, 20% blockade cost sort of thing….

Again, very very roughly:

15% materials
10% design
10% plant
10% getting everything there (the plant, materials, people, on site welfare, access to site, etc)
20% ‘labour’ - some of which is very specialised and thus expensive
10% signalling / electrification alterations & checks
10% main contractor’s fees (their overheads and profit)
10% Project management
5% possession / isolation costs

Obviously these can vary significantly depending on scale, complexity, location, and how the job is delivered. As can the price. Replacing a non standard crossover outside Liverpool Street will cost a lot more than replacing a standard crossover at Thetford.

 

[Meerkat]

Again, very very roughly:

15% materials
10% design
10% plant
10% getting everything there (the plant, materials, people, on site welfare, access to site, etc)
20% ‘labour’ - some of which is very specialised and thus expensive
10% signalling / electrification alterations & checks
10% main contractor’s fees (their overheads and profit)
10% Project management
5% possession / isolation costs

Obviously these can vary significantly depending on scale, complexity, location, and how the job is delivered. As can the price. Replacing a non standard crossover outside Liverpool Street will cost a lot more than replacing a standard crossover at Thetford.

Thanks. It’s still mind boggling numbers when all you have to compare it with is getting a new kitchen put in!

 

[a good off]

Taken in the last week of Ely North Jn before resignalling. Everyone at the time thought the soon to be new layout was insane. My photos.

 

[Tobbes]

Taken in the last week of Ely North Jn before resignalling. Everyone at the time thought the soon to be new layout was insane. My photos.

Ignoring who "everyone" was (because presumably those designing and approving it didn't think that it was insane), what was the reason for the opposition?

 

[bspahh]

East Cambs wildlife ‘at risk’ amid plans to build new railway bridge

An avid conservationist has slammed Network Rail plans to build a new bridge in east Cambridgeshire, claiming it puts wildlife “at risk”.

www.elystandard.co.uk

has comments from Andrew Balmford of Ely Wildspace http://www.elywildspace.org.uk/ about closure of the Kiln Lane level crossing

Mr Balmford said: “We understand the need to improve rail capacity through Ely as outlined in your consultation document.

“All the options for the Kiln Lane crossing involving the construction of vehicular / pedestrian bridges would have significantly adverse impacts on the adjacent Ely Pits and Meadows SSSI.

“The disturbance to the SSSI would be considerable both during any large-scale construction and in the longer term.

“There are also considerable landscape impacts with any proposed bridge option.

“The current consultation as set out does not provide any environmental impact data regarding the options and therefore, we believe, the public consultation process is fundamentally flawed and based purely on a visual preference for options, all of which would permanently damage the SSSI.

“We also question the need for such an expensive infrastructure project at what is a relatively quiet crossing.

“The cost and scale of the proposals appear to be a disproportionate response given the low level of vehicular use of the road.”

Mr Bullivant is now urging residents and members of Ely Wildspace to have their say on works as part of the Ely area capacity enhancements.

He added: “The construction and use of large bridges in the area would greatly diminish its amenity value, at a time when the importance of local nature-based recreation has never been greater.”

 

[cle]

This is from another thread:

"On the other hand, in this article it was mentioned that:"

CrossCountry is also seeking an additional ‘170’ to operate a new peak hour service between Cambridge and Peterborough (p12)., Modern Railways

Is anything known about this? Curious as I thought Ely was full - and the two-hourly Ipswich - Peterborough going hourly, not least to give Soham a decent service, would be first in line for a boost.

And could this be the beginnings of connecting it up to a B'ham-Leicester? Leicester-P'boro can fit it in, and surely removing a terminator from Leicester is helpful too?

 

[dk1]

This is from another thread:

"On the other hand, in this article it was mentioned that:"


Is anything known about this? Curious as I thought Ely was full - and the two-hourly Ipswich - Peterborough going hourly, not least to give Soham a decent service, would be first in line for a boost.

And could this be the beginnings of connecting it up to a B'ham-Leicester? Leicester-P'boro can fit it in, and surely removing a terminator from Leicester is helpful too?

It’s just detaching a 170 from an early Birmingham bound service to form an earlier departure in the opposite direction into Cambridge. Ely isn’t full, it’s just difficult to path extra trains reliably throughout the day over North Junction.

 

[Ianno87]

It’s just detaching a 170 from an early Birmingham bound service to form an earlier departure in the opposite direction into Cambridge. Ely isn’t full, it’s just difficult to path extra trains reliably throughout the day over North Junction.

It's effectively one extra train in one direction relatively early in the morning. Effectively starting the existing standard hour one train earlier (the first XC arrival at Cambridge from the Ely direction presently is a relatively late 0810)

 

[dk1]

It's effectively one extra train in one direction relatively early in the morning. Effectively starting the existing standard hour one train earlier (the first XC arrival at Cambridge from the Ely direction presently is a relatively late 0810)

Fits nicely into the usual XC hourly path. Surprised it’s not happened sooner.

 

[cle]

Thanks for the answer - makes sense. So that first B'ham service is a double-unit I take it.

 

[Ianno87]

Thanks for the answer - makes sense. So that first B'ham service is a double-unit I take it.

Not currently, but it will be.

 

[dk1]

Thanks for the answer - makes sense. So that first B'ham service is a double-unit I take it.

It will be should this happen.

 

[Mag_seven]

Just a quick reminder that this thread is for discussion of the Ely North junction upgrade proposals.

Thanks

 

[berwicksfinest]

They are all 50 now. You’d expect them to be the same (or very close to it). Given that almost all the freight is to/from the March direction, that will be the priority for speed if any decisions have to be made.

Both Bridges are 20mph for freight, 35mph for Multiple Units.

interestingly we have revised restrictions for Heavy Axle weight trains which now include Welney bridges (20mph) although they have a TSR of 40mph at the mo and March South Bridge at 30mph !!!

And lookingat speeds from Peterborough East we are more or less restricted to 40mph max in East anglia

 

[MikeWM]

East Cambs wildlife ‘at risk’ amid plans to build new railway bridge

An avid conservationist has slammed Network Rail plans to build a new bridge in east Cambridgeshire, claiming it puts wildlife “at risk”.

www.elystandard.co.uk

has comments from Andrew Balmford of Ely Wildspace http://www.elywildspace.org.uk/ about closure of the Kiln Lane level crossing

I entirely agree with his comments - I still see no good reason why the crossing can't be left entirely as it is, given the *very* light use by vehicular traffic.

Also this has reminded me to reply to the 'consultation', so that's useful too.

 

[bspahh]

I entirely agree with his comments - I still see no good reason why the crossing can't be left entirely as it is, given the *very* light use by vehicular traffic.

Also this has reminded me to reply to the 'consultation', so that's useful too.

I don't think the crossing can be left entirely as is. When there is a lot more rail traffic, it will need a bridge for pedestrians. Personally, for vehicular traffic, I would spend the money on relocating the Environment Agency site, factory and rowing club.

 

[Bald Rick]

Both Bridges are 20mph for freight, 35mph for Multiple Units.

The bridges are - I was responding to the question about the speed of the turnouts at Ely North
Junction.

I entirely agree with his comments - I still see no good reason why the crossing can't be left entirely as it is, given the *very* light use by vehicular traffic.

How does ‘if it stays as a level crossing, the barriers will be down almost permanently’ sound as a good reason?

 

[MikeWM]

How does ‘if it stays as a level crossing, the barriers will be down almost permanently’ sound as a good reason?

If it is replaced with a full-barrier crossing, probably so, per the discussion above. But why not just leave it exactly as it is?

I don't think the crossing can be left entirely as is. When there is a lot more rail traffic, it will need a bridge for pedestrians. Personally, for vehicular traffic, I would spend the money on relocating the Environment Agency site, factory and rowing club.

We're looking at 11 services an hour each way, as opposed to 7.5 now. Is that a sufficient difference to require a bridge, when there isn't one now?

Again, if full-barriers yes it would need a pedestrian bridge (indeed it would probably need one now), but leaving it precisely as it is seems fine to me.