• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

EWR, plausibility of a northern curve at Bedford/Oakley or Bletchley

Status
Not open for further replies.

richieb1971

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2013
Messages
1,981
Given that a big depot will emerge at M1 J15 at some point and that Daventry is already a booming intermodal depot for super markets and such, is there is any justifiable business case to produce a northern curve via EWR at Oakley or at Bletchey?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

richieb1971

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2013
Messages
1,981
I for one would use it and my daughter would use it living in Coventry and no drivers licence.

I guess that gives 1 extra point for it being at Bletchley rather than Oakley. Both curves would miss their respective junction stations. I would definitely prefer any freight to go through Bedford.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
16,030
I for one would use it and my daughter would use it living in Coventry and no drivers licence.

I guess that gives 1 extra point for it being at Bletchley rather than Oakley. Both curves would miss their respective junction stations. I would definitely prefer any freight to go through Bedford.
Where is the freight going to/from the new terminals? clearly its intermodal so to/from ports so its going to end up on the WCML heading south or E-W towards Southampton. I doubt a huge amount is going to go cross country to Felixstowe via E-W unless it is much quicker.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,290
Location
Torbay
A north curve at Bletchley would allow a Bedford-MKC service instead of Bedford-Bletchley, which people might actually use.
Passenger service could be achieved much more affordably by reversing trains at Bletchley station, either at the new high or low-level platforms.
 

Jorge Da Silva

Established Member
Joined
4 Apr 2018
Messages
2,592
Location
Cleethorpes, North East Lincolnshire
It could, but the MKC-Bedford service would be slower and considerably less attractive as a result.

I agree a north curve would allow a better service as MKC is a better place to terminate from Bedford also i think the DfT is planning a few services to terminate at Bletchley from Cambridge maybe up to 2tph, if that happens then there maybe more reason to build a north curve
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,290
Location
Torbay
It could, but the MKC-Bedford service would be slower and considerably less attractive as a result.
I agree a north curve would allow a better service as MKC is a better place to terminate from Bedford also i think the DfT is planning a few services to terminate at Bletchley from Cambridge maybe up to 2tph, if that happens then there maybe more reason to build a north curve
I think you're overplaying the extra time involved in a reversal, which might add only 3 or 4 minutes. A north curve, in addition to being very difficult to construct, would result in trains not being able to serve the existing station either, although an alternative far less convenient stop could be added at say Fenny Stratford or a new isolated platform on the new curve, although that would not provide the same convenient connections available to south and west at the main station, or could add significantly to journey time to achieve via MKC. MKC is an attractive place to serve by some means, not least for its longer distance connections to the Midlands and North West.
 

richieb1971

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2013
Messages
1,981
Passenger service could be achieved much more affordably by reversing trains at Bletchley station, either at the new high or low-level platforms.

Since Bletchley is already served by services by both fast EWR and slow Marston Vale trains the sole benefit of going straight MKC is the connectivity. If you were wanting to go north west from Bedford it would make a very quick change at MKC if your Pendo'ing to the north west. If you stop at Bletchley you need 3 trains to do the same journey. It also opens up other possibilities in the future.

Freight would be a better carrot to justify what is being asked. Unfortunately, whilst opening more path options there doesn't seem to be flow that would utilize it regularly at the current time. However, it doesn't mean that current flows to Daventry wouldn't use it if it existed.

As for the argument against cost, Werrington junction is having all sorts of millions of pounds spent on it for the sole purpose of freeing up paths on the fasts alone. If would ask me if that project is worth it I would say if the system has worked there for 100 years why is such a problem now?
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
16,030
Since Bletchley is already served by services by both fast EWR and slow Marston Vale trains the sole benefit of going straight MKC is the connectivity. If you were wanting to go north west from Bedford it would make a very quick change at MKC if your Pendo'ing to the north west. If you stop at Bletchley you need 3 trains to do the same journey. It also opens up other possibilities in the future.

Freight would be a better carrot to justify what is being asked. Unfortunately, whilst opening more path options there doesn't seem to be flow that would utilize it regularly at the current time. However, it doesn't mean that current flows to Daventry wouldn't use it if it existed.

As for the argument against cost, Werrington junction is having all sorts of millions of pounds spent on it for the sole purpose of freeing up paths on the fasts alone. If would ask me if that project is worth it I would say if the system has worked there for 100 years why is such a problem now?
Why do you need three trains if a workable reverse move at Bletchley is possible? Freight is worth pennies unless it opens up more passenger paths by getting them out the way, a la Werrington.
 

richieb1971

Established Member
Joined
28 Jan 2013
Messages
1,981
I agree it's not a cost effective measure to build a northern chord at Bletchley. But surely somewhere on the EWR there should be one.

If your coming from the south west you can only go north and if your coming from the east you can only go south.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,290
Location
Torbay
I agree it's not a cost effective measure to build a northern chord at Bletchley. But surely somewhere on the EWR there should be one.

If your coming from the south west you can only go north and if your coming from the east you can only go south.
For freight, it might be possible to create a new run-round/traction change yard facility alongside the Bletchley - Oxford line near Newton Longville. Looks like there's plenty of space but there'd no doubt be vociferous opposition from nearby housing.
 

Dr Hoo

Established Member
Joined
10 Nov 2015
Messages
3,986
Location
Hope Valley
Perhaps worth noting that at Ipswich there was a case for building a new East <-> North curve (only) for freight even though there was a 'relatively simple' run-round move available in Ipswich Yard. The curve was quite a tight fit with new river bridge, taking some land in use for industry and so on.

I realise that Felixstowe produces more trains than just Daventry and the future Northampton Gateway site will but the basic concept is sound enough. It would be necessary to gauge clear the tunnel at Newmarket as well.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
16,030
For freight, it might be possible to create a new run-round/traction change yard facility alongside the Bletchley - Oxford line near Newton Longville. Looks like there's plenty of space but there'd no doubt be vociferous opposition from nearby housing.
Originally there was going to be a loop there, only Bletchley bound though with no crossovers. Got culled fairly early on.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,290
Location
Torbay
Originally there was going to be a loop there, only Bletchley bound though with no crossovers. Got culled fairly early on.
Probably something that could be added fairly painlessly later if traffic demands, as long as some land is safeguarded. Conceptually a good idea for regulating any northbound intermodals from Soton about to join the busy WCML, if any were routed that way.
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,447
Location
Bristol
For freight, it might be possible to create a new run-round/traction change yard facility alongside the Bletchley - Oxford line near Newton Longville. Looks like there's plenty of space but there'd no doubt be vociferous opposition from nearby housing.
I'll point out that if required today, freight could be routed off the Marston Vale through Platform 5 and set back onto Bletchley Relief No.2, from where it can runround. It does involve the loco reversing on the Up Slow three times (once for the setback and twice for the runround), but given the likely demand for freight that's not going to cause any problems :lol:. Running round involves a 2nd staff member, so building a loop on the far side of Bletchley will add a significant cost to operations for staff facilities/transfer. Bletchley already has the station, depot and yard for staff and facilities so it would be cheaper.

Perhaps worth noting that at Ipswich there was a case for building a new East <-> North curve (only) for freight even though there was a 'relatively simple' run-round move available in Ipswich Yard. The curve was quite a tight fit with new river bridge, taking some land in use for industry and so on.

I realise that Felixstowe produces more trains than just Daventry and the future Northampton Gateway site will but the basic concept is sound enough. It would be necessary to gauge clear the tunnel at Newmarket as well.
Ipswich yard gets very busy with trains waiting for paths down the single line, or having to clear it before their path westbound is available. I also don't know if Ipswich Yard can take 775m trains - this would be another factor as the curve definitely can.
The basic concept is sound, but the practicalities of physically doing it at Bletchley are not. You'd have to remodel the TMD and Sidings and take out a number of businesses in the industrial estate. The local ground level is a good 5m lower as well so you'd need an embankment or viaduct, and to squeeze it in between the A5/Denbigh Hall Jn and the Bletchley Tesco you wouldn't get 775m standage. Bedford just won't have the demand, as there are already 2 Felixstowe <> Birmingham routes gauges cleared. I'm also led to believe from comments on other threads that gauge clearing Newmarket tunnel is not a simple job.

Probably something that could be added fairly painlessly later if traffic demands, as long as some land is safeguarded. Conceptually a good idea for regulating any northbound intermodals from Soton about to join the busy WCML, if any were routed that way.
It won't be painless, by any stretch. The need to landscape, the impact on nearby housing's views over the countryside and the noise of Class 66s stood idling will cause significant headaches in the planning process. Especially as trains could hold on the connecting line between Denbigh Hall Jn and Bletchley High Level (although that probably can't take 775m length). A regulating point would be much easier to provide at Bicester, if required.
 

SargeNpton

Established Member
Joined
19 Nov 2018
Messages
1,328
Unless it's been removed during the latest works, there is already a route from the Bletchley flyover through to the WCML slow lines. It runs from the base of the flyover, behind the stabling sidings and connecting with the slow lines close the the bridge that takes the railway over Watling Street.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,045
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Unless it's been removed during the latest works, there is already a route from the Bletchley flyover through to the WCML slow lines. It runs from the base of the flyover, behind the stabling sidings and connecting with the slow lines close the the bridge that takes the railway over Watling Street.

There is, but that's towards Oxford, we're talking about a route towards Bedford.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,494
Unless it's been removed during the latest works, there is already a route from the Bletchley flyover through to the WCML slow lines. It runs from the base of the flyover, behind the stabling sidings and connecting with the slow lines close the the bridge that takes the railway over Watling Street.

That's from the west - the OP is talking about a curve from the East to north on the WCML.

Where is the freight going to/from the new terminals? clearly its intermodal so to/from ports so its going to end up on the WCML heading south or E-W towards Southampton. I doubt a huge amount is going to go cross country to Felixstowe via E-W unless it is much quicker.

This was on a thread quite recently - presumably if you ran freight via EWR to Felixstowe, it would be via Cambridge and Newmarket and I'm pretty sure somebody posted Newmarket tunnel isn't gauge cleared.

And it would only benefit Felixstowe, because for Tilbury it would still be quicker / easier to go via the NLL and WCML and as you say South Coast will go nowhere near it.

Building such a curve feels alot like another 'solution looking for a problem'.
 
Last edited:

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,447
Location
Bristol
And it would only benefit Felixstowe, because for Tilbury it would still be quicker / easier to go via the NLL and WCML and as you say South Coast will go nowhere near it.
Felixstowe <> Daventry is a sizeable flow. It also could reduce pressure on Felixstowe <> Crewe/Trafford/Mossend through Leicester & Nuneaton, and open up a Daventry <> Doncaster/Teesport flow. However, the first on it's own wouldn't justify the costs of Cambridge-Ipswich let alone a whole new curve, and the other 2 are 'would be nice' territory rather than having any real operational or economic requirement. Felixstowe <> WCML already has via Stamford or London, and Daventry <> ECML can be done via London or the grand tour of suburban Birmingham to get to Burton avoiding New Street if anybody felt so inclined.
Building such a curve feels alot like another 'solution looking for a problem'.
Agreed.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,045
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Building such a curve feels alot like another 'solution looking for a problem'.

There is a very clear demand for a reasonably quick Milton Keynes Central to/from Bedford train service plus the interchange benefits such a thing would bring, and an underused Bedford to Bletchley one. That is very clearly a problem that it would solve, and the X5 demonstrates clearly that Stagecoach make plenty of money out of providing such a service. So I don't think it could in any way be placed in that category, though it might well fail cost-benefit analysis and it would be better not to solve the problem and spend the money on something else.

In terms of building it, it wouldn't be the most difficult one in the world - all the land needed is in a fairly old and ramshackle industrial estate, you wouldn't have to knock down a single house for it.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,494
Felixstowe <> Daventry is a sizeable flow. It also could reduce pressure on Felixstowe <> Crewe/Trafford/Mossend through Leicester & Nuneaton, and open up a Daventry <> Doncaster/Teesport flow. However, the first on it's own wouldn't justify the costs of Cambridge-Ipswich let alone a whole new curve, and the other 2 are 'would be nice' territory rather than having any real operational or economic requirement. Felixstowe <> WCML already has via Stamford or London, and Daventry <> ECML can be done via London or the grand tour of suburban Birmingham to get to Burton avoiding New Street if anybody felt so inclined.

Agreed.

How on earth would it open up a "Daventry <> Doncaster/Teesport flow" ?

I didn't think EWR was having junctions onto the ECML - so you'd either then have to send them up from Bedford along the MML, via Syston, thence to up the MML and beyond, or via Cambridge and onto Peterboro' ?

You can do Daventry - Doncaster now heading north, albeit with a reversal - and if it were that important, then surely it would be easier to put in a new curve from the WCML at either Lichfield or Tamworth to access the line to Burton / Derby ?
 

zwk500

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Jan 2020
Messages
13,447
Location
Bristol
How on earth would it open up a "Daventry <> Doncaster/Teesport flow" ?

I didn't think EWR was having junctions onto the ECML - so you'd either then have to send them up from Bedford along the MML, via Syston, thence to up the MML and beyond, or via Cambridge and onto Peterboro' ?

You can do Daventry - Doncaster now heading north, albeit with a reversal - and if it were that important, then surely it would be easier to put in a new curve from the WCML at either Lichfield or Tamworth to access the line to Burton / Derby ?
I was thinking via Cambridge tbh, but mainly using it as an example of how far outside the box you have to get to come up with ideas to make the chord useful...

Daventry - Doncaster Doesn't even need a reversal: DIRFT-Coventry-Stechford-Aston-Walsall-Sutton Park-Water Orton-Burton is W10 clear as far as I can tell from NESA.

There is a very clear demand for a reasonably quick Milton Keynes Central to/from Bedford train service plus the interchange benefits such a thing would bring, and an underused Bedford to Bletchley one. That is very clearly a problem that it would solve, and the X5 demonstrates clearly that Stagecoach make plenty of money out of providing such a service. So I don't think it could in any way be placed in that category, though it might well fail cost-benefit analysis and it would be better not to solve the problem and spend the money on something else.

In terms of building it, it wouldn't be the most difficult one in the world - all the land needed is in a fairly old and ramshackle industrial estate, you wouldn't have to knock down a single house for it.
the X5 has the advantage of calling at Bedford bus station, in the middle of town, and directly at MK Shopping district. Both Bedford and MK stations are somewhat removed from their respective town centres. (MKC is only really convenient for Network Rail and Santander offices, everything else is a stiff walk uphill). The train would have to be fast enough and cheap enough to compensate for the increased time to get to/from the stations and the inconvenience of walking or change onto bus at MK. There's also the missed revenue of providing another Bletchley-MKC service to consider.

It's technically feasible to build, yes, but kicking businesses out isn't a cost-free process either. They would still need compensation in the form of alternative premises or money to find them, as well as payments for disruption to business and costs of moving. And that's before you've started to remodel the TMD.
 
Last edited:

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,494
There is a very clear demand for a reasonably quick Milton Keynes Central to/from Bedford train service plus the interchange benefits such a thing would bring, and an underused Bedford to Bletchley one. That is very clearly a problem that it would solve, and the X5 demonstrates clearly that Stagecoach make plenty of money out of providing such a service. So I don't think it could in any way be placed in that category, though it might well fail cost-benefit analysis and it would be better not to solve the problem and spend the money on something else.

In terms of building it, it wouldn't be the most difficult one in the world - all the land needed is in a fairly old and ramshackle industrial estate, you wouldn't have to knock down a single house for it.

Yawn - you keep peddling this demand to travel from CMK to Bedford, yet nobody's ever proven there is such a demand. Let alone sufficient demand to spend a few million on a curve which doesn't exist and creates other problems, not least available paths between MK and Bletchley which could be otherwise used for something more useful.

The X5's advantage over the train - which will continue - is the fact it can and does serve various points en-route as you well know. So if you're wanting to travel from Bedford to MK, there's no guarantee you're destination within MK will be anywhere near the station.
 

4-SUB 4732

Established Member
Joined
7 Jan 2018
Messages
2,150
The obvious missing link is Northampton to Wellingborough, mostly for freight. If electrified, along with the MML to link Doncaster / Wakefield / York / Leeds, you're looking at a new electric spine from Daventry to the East Midlands and the North. It also opens up linkage from Leicester, Market Harborough, Kettering and Wellingborough to Northampton, connectivity to Milton Keynes as a bonus.

The north curve at Bletchley makes reasonable sense to me. In the future, with less main line non-stop and "Pendolino" passenger traffic, there will be capacity for freight via Weedon and fast line "Regional" stuff, so expect more trains to arrive on Platform 5 to go to Northampton, and more stuff on the up fast from Hanslope.

If this is the case, you reasonably open up Milton Keynes to a half-hourly service to Cambridge, and a half-hourly service to Oxford. They won't be the same services, but people would connect at MK. You then just thumb an hourly service from Aylesbury 'direct' over the Bedford-Bletchley, and you can extend that to wherever you so desire.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,494
the X5 has the advantage of calling at Bedford bus station, in the middle of town, and directly at MK Shopping district. Both Bedford and MK stations are somewhat removed from their respective town centres. (MKC is only really convenient for Network Rail and Santander offices, everything else is a stiff walk uphill). The train would have to be fast enough and cheap enough to compensate for the increased time to get to/from the stations and the inconvenience of walking or change onto bus at MK. There's also the missed revenue of providing another Bletchley-MKC service to consider.

I'd go further - knowing MK a bit (having worked there, Covid notwithstanding) for 2 decades this year - the vast majority of employment within MK *isn't* within walking distance of the station - you've got the area on the south-side, next to Bow Brickhill station, the area around Kingston centre and you've got Blakelands / Tongwell where the likes of VW, Mercedes et al are. None are walking distance from MKC station. And over the years that I've worked in MK, relatively few people live in Bedford that I've worked with - the majority have lived at MK and surrounding villages, Northampton / Towcester and then the likes of Luton, Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
98,045
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
I'd go further - knowing MK a bit (having worked there, Covid notwithstanding) for 2 decades this year - the vast majority of employment within MK *isn't* within walking distance of the station - you've got the area on the south-side, next to Bow Brickhill station, the area around Kingston centre and you've got Blakelands / Tongwell where the likes of VW, Mercedes et al are.

Those aren't of relevance to the X5 either. There is clearly central MK <-> Bedford demand, evidenced by the X5.

There is considerable commuting into MK by rail - go and look at MKC station in the morning once this whole COVID thing is done with.
 

A0wen

On Moderation
Joined
19 Jan 2008
Messages
7,494
The obvious missing link is Northampton to Wellingborough, mostly for freight. If electrified, along with the MML to link Doncaster / Wakefield / York / Leeds, you're looking at a new electric spine from Daventry to the East Midlands and the North. It also opens up linkage from Leicester, Market Harborough, Kettering and Wellingborough to Northampton, connectivity to Milton Keynes as a bonus.

The north curve at Bletchley makes reasonable sense to me. In the future, with less main line non-stop and "Pendolino" passenger traffic, there will be capacity for freight via Weedon and fast line "Regional" stuff, so expect more trains to arrive on Platform 5 to go to Northampton, and more stuff on the up fast from Hanslope.

If this is the case, you reasonably open up Milton Keynes to a half-hourly service to Cambridge, and a half-hourly service to Oxford. They won't be the same services, but people would connect at MK. You then just thumb an hourly service from Aylesbury 'direct' over the Bedford-Bletchley, and you can extend that to wherever you so desire.

No it isn't - it really isn't.

Northampton - Wellingborough would create *far* more problems, not least MML capacity going north.

Far better for traffic to join the MML further north i.e. Leicester or Derby, both of which can be done from Nuneaton or Lichfield. Places like Kettering and Market Harborough aren't destinations for either passenger flows or freight flows.

Northampton - Wellingborough will never be built - the old formation has gone completely and the bottom of the valley is a flood plain, parts of which are about to flood again as I type this.

As for the rest of your post, you're looking for 3 new paths between MK to Bletchley and onto EWR - I'll leave it to people like @The Planner to tell you whether that's even remotely viable........

Those aren't of relevance to the X5 either. There is clearly central MK <-> Bedford demand, evidenced by the X5.

There is considerable commuting into MK by rail - go and look at MKC station in the morning once this whole COVID thing is done with.

There is - but not from Bedford - or even Northampton for that matter.

The majority of it is from London or Herts - and that can be seen by the numbers getting off each train. And having on occasion used a morning train from Northampton into MK - you get a handful alighting at MK, whereas Pendo or even fast LM which has only stopped at places like Watford en route deposits far more.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top