Cambridge South new station construction progress.

[dk1]

If space (length) allows that layout is now preferred as it removes the diamond crossover - they are considered a maintenance and reliability overhead.

And yet they've started to make a comeback. Look at the elaborate layout provided recently at Boss Hall & Europa Junctions Ipswich & also Shenfield.

 

[swt_passenger]

And yet they've started to make a comeback. Look at the elaborate layout provided recently at Boss Hall & Europa Junctions Ipswich & also Shenfield.

Whoever explained it previously (and it’s come up a few times), said that there would always be layouts where it wasn’t possible, hence me including ‘if space allows’.

 

[eastdyke]

And yet they've started to make a comeback. Look at the elaborate layout provided recently at Boss Hall & Europa Junctions Ipswich & also Shenfield.

Surely because it allows maximum capacity on all routes by permitting parallel moves? Especially for (but not limited to) the slower moving half mile long freights.

 

[MarkyT]

And yet they've started to make a comeback. Look at the elaborate layout provided recently at Boss Hall & Europa Junctions Ipswich & also Shenfield.

Diamonds are OK as long as they're fixed. What everyone wants to avoid at all costs are the dreaded switched diamonds which are a nightmare to maintain and keep in adjustment. Fixed diamonds need to be fairly short and are generally only suitable for fairly slow junctions. As the crossing angle gets smaller with higher speeds, flange gaps at the crossings become too long for ride quality and safety, and a switched type would be needed. To avoid this, a ladder as seen at Shepreth Branch Junction is preferred. A ladder junction also provides a crossover function that could be of some use for certain regular and out of course movements.

 

[dk1]

Diamonds are OK as long as they're fixed. What everyone wants to avoid at all costs are the dreaded switched diamonds which are a nightmare to maintain and keep in adjustment. Fixed diamonds need to be fairly short and are generally only suitable for fairly slow junctions. As the crossing angle gets smaller with higher speeds, flange gaps at the crossings become too long for ride quality and safety, and a switched type would be needed. To avoid this, a ladder as seen at Shepreth Branch Junction is preferred. A ladder junction also provides a crossover function that could be of some use for certain regular and out of course movements.

The newer ones at Ipswich Bacon Factory Curve all move. Quite impressive junctions.

 

[MarkyT]

The newer ones at Ipswich Bacon Factory Curve all move. Quite impressive junctions.

I'm quite surprised, but they must have been justified in terms of the space available, standage for the long container trains and speeds required.

 

[Kettledrum]

Parking would be a bad idea. The new Addenbrookes Road, built from the M11 to the hospital, already grinds to a half at peak times. The road capacity is all used up- adding parking would make that worse.

That's a shame. Parking could have been a carrot to attract private investors who would like the idea of a large regular and reliable income stream. If I was one of the investors I'd want to build a huge car park on the site.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm quite surprised, but they must have been justified in terms of the space available, standage for the long container trains and speeds required.

Correct. It was the only way to get the junction at 30mph and have it before the bridge over the Gipping. Even the the toes of the points are on the bridge, not ideal. Maintaining a decent linespeed is everything for (nearly) half mile long trains.

 

[bspahh]

The front page of the Cambridge Independent http://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk from March 7-13th has a story about Cambridge South being quoted costing over £200m, for delivery in 2022. I had a look around for some online sources of this, but it isn't on their WWW site.

There was a tweet from the region mayor James Palmer https://twitter.com/MayorJPalmer/status/968561583323598848 where he says

Over 200 million for Cambridge south station last I heard. Network Rail in drastic need of major reform.

The newspaper article says

Mr Palmer said he is not prepared to support plans for Cambridge South unless the 2022 delivery date is brought forward. He said: "No one will ever be able to convince me that 2022 is an acceptable target date for the completion of Cambridge South station. Work should start as soon as possible and we should look to have it open by 2021."

His focus on 2021 might have something to do with that being when he is up for re-election.

 

[jopsuk]

Palmer is a blow-hard who's not got as much funding as he wants and is trying to strip powers from the county and city deal. He's got no real concept of what a station of this type, with the huge amount of trackwork required, should cost.

 

[snowball]

The newer ones at Ipswich Bacon Factory Curve all move. Quite impressive junctions.

I'm no expert on track or S&C and I'm ready to be corrected by anyone who knows better, but looking at the Bacon Factory Curve on Google satellite view I don't think there are any actual diamonds, whether switched or plain - merely ordinary points, blade end to blade end.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm no expert on track or S&C and I'm ready to be corrected by anyone who knows better, but looking at the Bacon Factory Curve on Google satellite view I don't think there are any actual diamonds, whether switched or plain - merely ordinary points, blade end to blade end.

Definitely diamonds @ Boss Hall Jn, swills will confirm as he works them!

 

[Bald Rick]

The front page of the Cambridge Independent http://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk from March 7-13th has a story about Cambridge South being quoted costing over £200m, for delivery in 2022. I had a look around for some online sources of this, but it isn't on their WWW site.

There was a tweet from the region mayor James Palmer https://twitter.com/MayorJPalmer/status/968561583323598848 where he says

The newspaper article says

His focus on 2021 might have something to do with that being when he is up for re-election.

A job that must need land purchase, most likely an order in under the Transport & Works Act, new tracks, resignalling south of Cambridge, all in 3 years from a standing start.....

He’s welcome to find someone else who can do that.

 

[dk1]

I'm no expert on track or S&C and I'm ready to be corrected by anyone who knows better, but looking at the Bacon Factory Curve on Google satellite view I don't think there are any actual diamonds, whether switched or plain - merely ordinary points, blade end to blade end.

Never trust modern IT. It will not do you any favours. Trust me instead as I drive trains over them daily.

 

[Bald Rick]

Never trust modern IT. It will not do you any favours. Trust me instead as I drive trains over them daily.

The IT is fine.

 

[eastdyke]

I'm no expert on track or S&C and I'm ready to be corrected by anyone who knows better, but looking at the Bacon Factory Curve on Google satellite view I don't think there are any actual diamonds, whether switched or plain - merely ordinary points, blade end to blade end.

There was a piece in RailEngineer, May 2014, describing the completed project (both on-time and within budget):
https://www.railengineer.uk/2014/05/01/ipswich-chord-freight/
In particular:

CEN56 ‘FV’ IBCL switches have been installed at each junction. The junctions include the first use on Network Rail of modular switch diamonds.

I hope that the local reptiles (I was originally from Ipswich) are making good use of their new 'basking areas'

 

[dk1]

The IT is fine.

Google Satellite

 

[bspahh]

The front page of the Cambridge Independent http://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk from March 7-13th has a story about Cambridge South being quoted costing over £200m, for delivery in 2022. I had a look around for some online sources of this, but it isn't on their WWW site.

The story is here http://www.cambridgeindependent.co....m-cambridge-south-station-price-tag-1-5425847

 

[camflyer]

A job that must need land purchase, most likely an order in under the Transport & Works Act, new tracks, resignalling south of Cambridge, all in 3 years from a standing start.....

He’s welcome to find someone else who can do that.

"It just needs a platform" according to Lord Adonis

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-south-station-could-built-14270779

I suspect the truth is somewhere between. Doing it properly and putting in 4 tracks is the right thing to do but a cost of £200m does sound ridiculous compared to other rail infrastructure projects.

 

[a good off]

From his very public rants, I genuinely believe that Adonis is having some sort of mental break down.

 

[MarkyT]

Just had a look at RTT for Shepreth branch Junction tomorrow and I can't find an hour with more than 19 trains passing in total for both directions. If all passenger trains stop there, I struggle to see why a full four platform station should be required at Cambridge South for that traffic level. Maybe initially a simple two platform station could be constructed without any major layout and signalling alterations (there are usually SMALL changes required nonetheless for both PW and S&T even if there's no significant reconfiguration), but clearly even this would require design, land purchase, planning etc. The simple two outer platform station could be designed for future provision of additional outer platforms with indendent tracks heading south to the junction, to reduce conflict and cater for growth. I doubt four tracks all the way through to Cambridge station, nor a grade separation for the Shepreth branch could be justified.

Maybe four years is a little excessive but even with a reduced scope two or three years from a standing start would be very good going, and passive provision for future facilities would require very careful and time consuming design. A problem is with crayonista politicians is they want everything delivered today, or more specifically within their current tenure. True statesmanlike behaviour would accept that some grand plans, although perhaps initiated under their reign, might complete after they have left office, sometimes many years after. If there is any merit in such proposals then the important thing is they are built, and built right for the long term.

 

[jopsuk]

there's short and medium term additional services though. And a lot of services that I wouldn't have stop at South

South is most needed for local commuting. On that basis, the future services should be:
GN branch:
2tph Maidstone East stopper (serves all the south cambs villages and north herts towns)
2tph Brighton semi-fast (serves the north herts towns)
2tph express (not stopping here)
2tph Oxford

Plus peak time extras

then
GE branch:
3tph Liverpool Street (mix of stopping patterns)
1tph Cross Country (not stopping)
1tph GA Airport

Plus peak time extras both branches

That's a projected 11tph each way, so 22tph at the junction, off peak.

 

[dk1]

I fail to understand why anyone would think small. The bigger station the better. 11 services each way every hour & that's without freight/engineering trains. A four platform grand affair it needs to be from the outset.

 

[Bald Rick]

Just had a look at RTT for Shepreth branch Junction tomorrow and I can't find an hour with more than 19 trains passing in total for both directions. If all passenger trains stop there, I struggle to see why a full four platform station should be required at Cambridge South for that traffic level. Maybe initially a simple two platform station could be constructed without any major layout and signalling alterations (there are usually SMALL changes required nonetheless for both PW and S&T even if there's no significant reconfiguration), but clearly even this would require design, land purchase, planning etc. The simple two outer platform station could be designed for future provision of additional outer platforms with indendent tracks heading south to the junction, to reduce conflict and cater for growth. I doubt four tracks all the way through to Cambridge station, nor a grade separation for the Shepreth branch could be justified.

Maybe four years is a little excessive but even with a reduced scope two or three years from a standing start would be very good going, and passive provision for future facilities would require very careful and time consuming design. A problem is with crayonista politicians is they want everything delivered today, or more specifically within their current tenure. True statesmanlike behaviour would accept that some grand plans, although perhaps initiated under their reign, might complete after they have left office, sometimes many years after. If there is any merit in such proposals then the important thing is they are built, and built right for the long term.

If all trains were to stop (they aren’t) and the trains weren’t constrained by other factors (they are), and the London - Cambridge journey time wasn’t a very sensitive subject with stakeholders (it is, in spades) then I would agree.

However, there are plenty of trains on minimum headway (3 minutes) at that location; therefore if the first one stops the second will automatically have to be delayed, regardless of whether it stops or not. This would cause it to miss its slot at the Welwyn viaduct, or Ely N Jn, or the single line to Lynn, or the TL core, or be later through Bishops Stortford delaying the following Stansted express (which is constrained by the single tunnel) etc.etc.

As it is, it has been proved that a 4 platform station is required in order to stop anything there.

 

[MarkyT]

I fail to understand why anyone would think small. The bigger station the better. 11 services each way every hour & that's without freight/engineering trains. A four platform grand affair it needs to be from the outset.

As it is, it has been proved that a 4 platform station is required in order to stop anything there.

Another advantage of going straight for the full four platform build out rather than attempting an interim smaller facility bodge (which doesn't seem plausible anyway taking into account Bald Rick's comment) is the subsequent cost and disruption of the expansion job would be avoided, as well as the no doubt higher cumulative costs of having two bites at the cherry rather than one big bang (I think I may be mixing my metaphors there!). A brand new four track station, with new junctions and signalling to suit is a big job, so from a standing start, four years to get finance in place, finalise scheme development with planning, land purchase, possible T&W orders to ensure powers, road alterations, perhaps a new busway stop, tenders issued, contracts let and detailed design and then construction complete is not unreasonable at all. Heck, I don't believe they've even got a celebrity architect on board yet to create a suitable iconic design, referencing the academic and medical connections of the site.

 

[camflyer]

I fail to understand why anyone would think small. The bigger station the better. 11 services each way every hour & that's without freight/engineering trains. A four platform grand affair it needs to be from the outset.

Plus the eventual (one day) arrival of East-West Rail and any Cambridge light rail link out to Granta Park and Haverhill. This needs doing properly.

From what I hear from someone involved with the Biomedical Campus development, the four platform station is definitely the preferred solution and to make the construction cost more economically viable, it is likely to include a new hotel and AstraZeneca have "donated" some land to the project in lieu of a financial contribution.

There are certainly no plans for any significant car parking at the station as the idea is to reduce the number of cars in the area and it is mostly seen as an inward commuting destination. Parking provision on the whole of the CBC is extremely limited with most staff being expected to use public transport, cycle or park offsite.

 

[dk1]

Plus the eventual (one day) arrival of East-West Rail and any Cambridge light rail link out to Granta Park and Haverhill. This needs doing properly.

From what I hear from someone involved with the Biomedical Campus development, the four platform station is definitely the preferred solution and to make the construction cost more economically viable, it is likely to include a new hotel and AstraZeneca have "donated" some land to the project in lieu of a financial contribution.

There are certainly no plans for any significant car parking at the station as the idea is to reduce the number of cars in the area and it is mostly seen as an inward commuting destination. Parking provision on the whole of the CBC is extremely limited with most staff being expected to use public transport, cycle or park offsite.

Sounds absolutely perfect. This has to be one of the most obviously successful stations in waiting anywhere. Any thought of doing it on the cheap has quite rightly been totally discounted. The proposed EW reopening has been paramount in all planning from the start.

 

[camflyer]

One year later...

Article in today's Cambridge News about the possibility of a "pop up" station though mostly it just repeats things we already know such as Adonis' claim that "it just needs a platform"

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/cambridge-news/cambridge-south-popup-station-finished-16026582

 

[whittlesfordok]

Just a platform is a joke and why do a pop up when you are going to the real thing!

 

[MarkyT]

From Bald Rick's comment of 12/03/2018 above, a simple two platform arrangement, whether 'pop up' or otherwise, will not work UNLESS all trains stopped there and would require a timetable recast anyway. Once a stop had been established in every service I suspect it would be difficult to withdraw any calls assuming it was acceptable to increase journey times (for the Kings Cross expresses in particular*) in the first place.
* IMHO the station being sited at such a prestigious medical research establishment would make it a good candidate as the first stop from London on the 'cruisers'. Think in terms of Francis Crick Institute to Biomedical complex. Compelling if the Cambridge South stop could be taken as the headline London-Cambridge journey time, Tottenham Hale style with respect to 'London' travel times on the Stansted Express.