Stevenage platform 5

[malc-c]

I have serious doubts that this was simply "tree pruning". The trees along the north bound slow line have been removed completely, and there is a lot of ground work going on. No expert, but the area adjacent to the slow line between the A602 bridge and Six Hills way bridge looks like compacted hard core and is wide enough for a track bed. There also seems to be lots of short blue ducting /piping laid out in a line in preparation for installing somewhere. If I get chance I'll take some pictures and upload them in the next few days.

 

[malc-c]

Well I've just had a live chat with Network rail and was informed that this is part of the foliage clearance program, and that the agent had no information as to when (or if) the work for a 5th platform was scheduled. But the clearance has been so brutal, with all the trees being removed. Not what I would class as a conservation of the local environment.

 

[Saint66]

Passed through a couple of times last week on LNER and I agree that it looks much more than just vegetation removal, with quite a bit of groundwork, plant and contractors on site.

 

[Fred26]

Well I've just had a live chat with Network rail and was informed that this is part of the foliage clearance program, and that the agent had no information as to when (or if) the work for a 5th platform was scheduled. But the clearance has been so brutal, with all the trees being removed. Not what I would class as a conservation of the local environment.

If the NWR live chat are as clueless as the GTR Twitter team then they'll be wrong.
The area being worked in is where the platform will go. Also, work has taken place to level what will be the track bed.

 

[malc-c]

Well, this looks a bit extravagant for tree pruning. I have to agree that it does indeed look like the ground work in advance of track laying, and the addition of a 5th platform at Stevenage

 

[jopsuk]

The banner on the building reading "Stevenage Turnback Facility " is pretty much conclusive

 

[jon0844]

The banner on the building reading "Stevenage Turnback Facility " is pretty much conclusive

It's merely a warning for non-locals to stay away! Turn back! Turn back! it should say.

 

[malc-c]

The banner on the building reading "Stevenage Turnback Facility " is pretty much conclusive

LOL - yeah that was my conclusion, and the fact this was backed up by the guy marshalling the trucks. !! - Makes me wonder if it's a genuine case that the agent I chatted with this morning actually didn't know, or have been told to say it's just tree clearing !

 

[dtaylor84]

LOL - yeah that was my conclusion, and the fact this was backed up by the guy marshalling the trucks. !! - Makes me wonder if it's a genuine case that the agent I chatted with this morning actually didn't know, or have been told to say it's just tree clearing !

Why would they tell the agent the truth, then ask them to lie about it? Far easier to just not inform them.

Easier still to believe there's no conspiracy at all and NR are as bad at communicating to their front line staff as everyone else...

 

[Fred26]

Where abouts is the NWR building?

 

[malc-c]

Leydon Road.

Seems google has an up-to-date map looking at the image date

 

[Chris125]

It says 2019 at the bottom wherever you look - Google Earth gives the date as 25/6/2018.

 

[Fred26]

Thanks.

 

[Brissle Girl]

This project is a good example of the paralysis that the rail industry has suffered for many years. The problem of turning back trains at Stevenage and/or platform occupation has existed for many years. 25 years ago trains used to run in on the down line, then exit north out of the station, cross over the main lines into the up platform before departing. Since then other options used have been 1) to run to Letchworth, though still crossing a flat junction until the flyover was built and 2) make one of the lines from Herford bidirectional, to at least remove the main line conflict problem.

Yet for all that time a route in adjacent to the west of the line for just 3/4 of a mile has been available (or certainly was) without, I believe, any land purchase. It could be as simple as one new set of points, some new track and a platform, none of which would touch the existing four tracks. Yet in a letter from the DfT to the local MP a year ago, the signalling work is described as complex, involving major disruptive work at Hitchin, Langley Jn and Hertford, together with a disruptive weekend closure covering all these locations.

https://www.markprisk.com/sites/www...risk MP concerning the Stevenage Turnback.pdf
(edited for new link)
Why is this so complex? Is it an example of an over-engineered project or what? It seems very difficult to find anything on the NR site as to exactly what is involved.

 

[malc-c]

I get a 404 page not found on that link. From my limited search I can't find any details on what's been proposed for the project. This could be something as "simple" as installing another point under the A602 over bridge and then have the track run parallel to the main lines into a 5th bay platform at Stevenage and signal for bi-directional running up to the crossover just south of the B197 over bridge. Or it could involve some sort of fly-over similar to that at Welwyn Garden City for the WGc to Mooregate services.

The comments from the chap I spoke with at the site entrance hinted that it could be two years before track is laid, which may be in line with the original projection of end of 2021, rather then the end of 2019 as has been suggested in various news paper reports. I guess the only thing to do is to simply keep watching to see how things develop. Even if I knocked on the door of their offices I doubt that they would show me the plans

 

[malc-c]

I've uploaded a short video

 

[Brissle Girl]

I get a 404 page not found on that link. From my limited search I can't find any details on what's been proposed for the project. This could be something as "simple" as installing another point under the A602 over bridge and then have the track run parallel to the main lines into a 5th bay platform at Stevenage and signal for bi-directional running up to the crossover just south of the B197 over bridge. Or it could involve some sort of fly-over similar to that at Welwyn Garden City for the WGc to Mooregate services.

Apologies. Link now corrected. There's no need for any further grade separation, and the existing dive-under is already bi-directional and has been for many years, to allow turn-backs into platform 4. All this project needs to do is keep the services clear of the down slow and platform 4, ie the simple solution you describe.

 

[Fred26]

Apologies. Link now corrected. There's no need for any further grade separation, and the existing dive-under is already bi-directional and has been for many years, to allow turn-backs into platform 4. All this project needs to do is keep the services clear of the down slow and platform 4, ie the simple solution you describe.

Which, I believe, is what is happening. I'm told the platform will be able to accommodate 8 carriages, presumably so that some trains can terminate if need be.
If I were to make an educated guess as to why a max of 8 coaches and not 12, I'd say it's because roughly where the platform is being built will give it enough space for 8 coaches with the end of the platform about level with platform 3/4. For those wondering, the north end of the platform will start adjacent to the first bench behind the platform 3/4 lift, running to the south.

 

[Class 170101]

Looks like NR are planning for it to be commissioned at August Bank Holiday Saturday and Sunday. No trains south of Peterborough or west of Shepreth Branch Jn to Kings Cross throughout on all routes.

Page 264 of the following link makes mention of Stevenage Turnback commissioning
http://archive.nr.co.uk/browse documents/Rules Of The Route/Viewable copy/EASyearXX/70lneXX.pdf

 

[jopsuk]

Looks like NR are planning for it to be commissioned at August Bank Holiday Saturday and Sunday. No trains south of Peterborough or west of Shepreth Branch Jn to Kings Cross throughout on all routes.

Page 264 of the following link makes mention of Stevenage Turnback commissioning
http://archive.nr.co.uk/browse documents/Rules Of The Route/Viewable copy/EASyearXX/70lneXX.pdf

a little off-topic, but could they rather than bussing from Peterborough, run ECML diesel (LNER, GC and HT) services into Cambridge from the north, with a strengthened Greater Anglia service? Or is that too "joined up"?

 

[A0wen]

a little off-topic, but could they rather than bussing from Peterborough, run ECML diesel (LNER, GC and HT) services into Cambridge from the north, with a strengthened Greater Anglia service? Or is that too "joined up"?

I suspect capacity between Peterborough and Cambridge, crews with route knowledge and, to be honest, the fact it's probably more practical to change that volume of passengers at Peterborough is the reason it isn't being done.

Cambridge - Peterborough will take circa 45-50 mins. Cambridge - Liverpool St is another 60-70 mins.

Given that a National Express coach is timed to cover Peterborough - Golders Green in 1h 50m - it's not even quicker for passengers to route them via Cambridge depending on where they are dropped off in London.

 

[A0wen]

If I were to make an educated guess as to why a max of 8 coaches and not 12, I'd say it's because roughly where the platform is being built will give it enough space for 8 coaches with the end of the platform about level with platform 3/4. For those wondering, the north end of the platform will start adjacent to the first bench behind the platform 3/4 lift, running to the south.

I'll offer an even more educated guess - the use of this platform is for trains from Hertford - these are all Moorgate services and the Moorgate branch can't accommodate 12 car trains due to platform lengths at every station. Why build a 12 car platform when there won't be 12 car trains - at least not in the next 50 years? The only way the Moorgate line could accommodate longer trains would be to completely close and rebuild it.

 

[TheDavibob]

I suspect capacity between Peterborough and Cambridge, crews with route knowledge and, to be honest, the fact it's probably more practical to change that volume of passengers at Peterborough is the reason it isn't being done.

You say that, but all three companies happily divert (diesel workings) via Cambridge (non-stop) when the ECML is closed between Peterborough and Hitchin: route knowledge and line capacity (at weekends, presumably in place of freight workings) are fine. Granted, there probably isn't capacity at Cambridge, either onwards to London or for Cambridge itself, so I'm happy to accept it's not practical.

 

[jyte]

There were Cambridge-Ely diverts at the beginning of this year. Not all Diesel, some class 91 Electric trains were hauled over the route by class 67s.

One thing I'll say about LNER/Virgin Trains is that they manage to run a reasonably impressive divert service when parts of the ECML are closed. It's a shame they've opted for bussing in this case.

 

[A0wen]

There were Cambridge-Ely diverts at the beginning of this year. Not all Diesel, some class 91 Electric trains were hauled over the route by class 67s.

One thing I'll say about LNER/Virgin Trains is that they manage to run a reasonably impressive divert service when parts of the ECML are closed. It's a shame they've opted for bussing in this case.

Yes, but those are usually when the closure is between Hitchin and Peterborough so the services then run from Cambridge to Hitchin and back on the ECML.

There might also be engineering on the GEML that weekend which may also limit capacity?

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

I'll offer an even more educated guess - the use of this platform is for trains from Hertford - these are all Moorgate services and the Moorgate branch can't accommodate 12 car trains due to platform lengths at every station. Why build a 12 car platform when there won't be 12 car trains - at least not in the next 50 years? The only way the Moorgate line could accommodate longer trains would be to completely close and rebuild it.

Platform 5 supposedly has passive provision to route back onto the Down Slow, so there is possibility for it to be used as an additional mainline Slow platform as well as the Hertford platform and thus could take a 12 car train. However, that depends on timetabling - slotting in between the Hertfords and whether moving something over from the Down Slow to the Hertford platform delivers any benefit (i.e. lets some other train overtake it).
I would argue the bulk of the cost in this project is in laying the track, resignalling etc. I expect the platform itself is actually not that large a cost, so if they did have the opportunity to make it 12 cars long I suspect they would. But the footbridge does present an immovable obstruction so it makes sense to stop there, if I'm reading the satellite pictures right, and it doesn't (presently) make sense to extend the platform any further south to let it take 12 cars, but I bet passive provision could be made, as I think in the long term all trains north of Stevenage will be longer than 8 cars?

 

[jyte]

Yes, but those are usually when the closure is between Hitchin and Peterborough so the services then run from Cambridge to Hitchin and back on the ECML.

There might also be engineering on the GEML that weekend which may also limit capacity?

Forgot there wasn't a diversionary route around Hitchin...ooops.

Perhaps this demonstrates the need for bi-directional signalling between Welwyn Garden City and Hitchin (similar to how the Trent valley is signalled, with bi-di centre roads).

 

[A0wen]

Forgot there wasn't a diversionary route around Hitchin...ooops.

Perhaps this demonstrates the need for bi-directional signalling between Welwyn Garden City and Hitchin (similar to how the Trent valley is signalled, with bi-di centre roads).

I fail to see what that would achieve?

Presumably there will be a 'block' closure around Stevenage to allow for all the signalling to the new platform to be tested which can't be done when there is a 'live' railway running alongside it?

 

[SteveOfTheStow]

Diversionary routes aside, if it's true that Platform 5 is being planned for commissioning this August Bank Holiday, isn't that ahead of schedule? (albeit a consistently delayed and, from a layman's perpsective, conservative schedule). That means Watton-at-Stone - Hertford travellers may not have to put up with the bus service for very long. I'm surprised that this info hasn't been jumped on by stakeholders.

 

[Fred26]

I'll offer an even more educated guess - the use of this platform is for trains from Hertford - these are all Moorgate services and the Moorgate branch can't accommodate 12 car trains due to platform lengths at every station. Why build a 12 car platform when there won't be 12 car trains - at least not in the next 50 years? The only way the Moorgate line could accommodate longer trains would be to completely close and rebuild it.

No, that's not what I said. Moorgate trains will only ever be 6-car, no longer, unless some serious tunnelling is done on the NCL.
However, platform 5 will be 8-car so that trains from the south can terminate easily during disruption, or engineering for instance. Also, as mentioned above there will be passive provision for a through line if need be.