What is really happening with East West Rail (EWR) between Bedford and Cambridge

[HilversumNS]

Deleted

 

[The Planner]

If they lay rails, trains can run. Simple as.

Except it isn't that simple and you know it. The Western section is effectively a high speed new piece of railway, not a case of just putting down some new rails. Apart from the remedial work on structures, earthworks, complete new signalling, new track etc, there is nothing to do.

 

[richieb1971]

All that was in the 2017 opening. Its the wires they say are holding things up.

I asked the EWR to explain and verify the newspaper statement. Nothing yet.

 

[A0wen]

Christ on a bike the way some of you are talking you would think the area between Bedford and Stevenage was like the Alps - it is fairly undulating country with a few unremarkable hills. :roll:

I think you need to look at a map. From leaving Luton through to Harpenden the railway runs along the bottom of the valley and the height increases quite significantly in the mile either side as the attached link to an OS map shows.

And most people on here seem to want a Luton - Stevenage link.

If you were talking Hitchin - Bedford, I'd agree with you, not least because there was previously a line there that had worked around the gradients on the land.

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/idld.srf...searchp=s.srf&dn=767&ax=514488&ay=218877&lm=0

 

[DarloRich]

There is some wibble written by the clueless on this thread about prices. Whilst clearly qualified quantity surveyours your understanding of working within the railway boundary is limited to say the least.

It is NOT the same operating environment as a building site. I cant be bothered to rehash all of the arguments because you simply don't care.

I think you need to look at a map. From leaving Luton through to Harpenden the railway runs along the bottom of the valley and the height increases quite significantly in the mile either side as the attached link to an OS map shows.

And most people on here seem to want a Luton - Stevenage link.

If you were talking Hitchin - Bedford, I'd agree with you, not least because there was previously a line there that had worked around the gradients on the land.

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/idld.srf...searchp=s.srf&dn=767&ax=514488&ay=218877&lm=0

Ideally I would like a north facing link out of Bedford to increase connectivity/services.

In any event we aren't talking about the Pennines or the Grampians we are talking about small hills. I will have a look at the OS maps when i am home.

 

[edwin_m]

I'd suggest the terrain is "undulating" similar to that in Kent traversed by HS1.

 

[ac6000cw]

I think you need to look at a map. From leaving Luton through to Harpenden the railway runs along the bottom of the valley and the height increases quite significantly in the mile either side as the attached link to an OS map shows.

And most people on here seem to want a Luton - Stevenage link.

If you were talking Hitchin - Bedford, I'd agree with you, not least because there was previously a line there that had worked around the gradients on the land.

http://www.streetmap.co.uk/idld.srf...searchp=s.srf&dn=767&ax=514488&ay=218877&lm=0

Actually, looking at the map, if an MK-Luton-Stevenage link is desired then it might be sensible to link the Bletchley-Bedford line to the MML where they get close to each other south of Bedford (near Millbrook the lines are only about 1km apart) and avoid Bedford altogether i.e. have the main MML interchange at Luton, which is a much larger urban area than Bedford anyway and also has the airport traffic potential.

 

[richieb1971]

Actually, looking at the map, if an MK-Luton-Stevenage link is desired then it might be sensible to link the Bletchley-Bedford line to the MML where they get close to each other south of Bedford (near Millbrook the lines are only about 1km apart) and avoid Bedford altogether i.e. have the main MML interchange at Luton, which is a much larger urban area than Bedford anyway and also has the airport traffic potential.

I'm 50% for this idea. 80% towards having a northern Bedford junction out of Oakley going east to south of St Neots and so forth.

But 100% for reopening the Northampton line to Bedford and have bi-directional choices at Bletchley to go direct to Bedford via the branch (and miss Bedford) or go round the block to Northampton (or almost all the way to Northampton) and include Bedford on the route.

Thus making MKC part of a circular rather than a terminated station on route.

 

[Pigeon]

"(and miss Bedford)" - do you mean "(and miss MK)"?

I certainly agree that Bedford-Northampton is a good idea, because it combines the advantages of being a useful and straightforward workaround for the problem of both MK and Bedford being awkwardly off to one side of the EW route rather than directly on it, and of extra connectivity in its own right for journeys where EWR of itself provides little improvement. Not only for passenger journeys; it plus Bedford-Cambridge would give a route from Felixstowe to DIRFT that avoids the WCML altogether.

Luton-Stevenage and the like I think are best considered as a separate project. In the context of EWR it does little for routes including Bedford-Cambridge because it is such a long way round and because it introduces more difficulties with capacity on existing main lines. There are a lot of other towns in the M1-A1(M)-M11 sector just north of the M25 which are poorly connected east-west by rail, and working out how best to connect them is a complex matter in its own right without the added difficulty of also trying to make it part of another route for which it is ill-suited.

As regards hills, sure they may not be very large, but they are enough to make a difference; in particular the land rises 40-50m in 1km or so to the east of the Ouse/MML north of Bedford, a rise both sharper and higher than that through which the Midland found it necessary to drive Old Warden tunnel. It is an area where the upsy-downery is penetrated by an "inlet" of significantly flatter land coming in from the east that does not call for tunnelling - and which is right where we want to go, and in days gone by, did go. It would be foolish not to consider how best to take advantage of the useful features of this topography.

There is some wibble written by the clueless on this thread about prices. Whilst clearly qualified quantity surveyours your understanding of working within the railway boundary is limited to say the least.

It is NOT the same operating environment as a building site. I cant be bothered to rehash all of the arguments because you simply don't care.

Assuming that includes my comments on platform extensions, then you are quite right that I don't care. The situation - that we could have on one side of the fence a few guys with a digger and a possession building a square lump, while a few yards away on the other side some other guys could be building a whole bunch of houses for less money - is so patently ridiculous that the arguments can be rejected unheard because they lead to an unreasonable result. It is those arguments which are the true "wibble", and the true "clueless" are those who do not recognise them as such.

 

[jopsuk]

For Luton-Stevenage, this may be heresy, but perhaps the best option would be to tunnel under the taxiway from the car park at the airport and build a bus road/busway (not an open road), connecting through to Stevenage station

 

[richieb1971]

"(and miss Bedford)" - do you mean "(and miss MK)"?

Nope.. Missing Bedford. The route down the branch would head east around Kempston Hardwick and past Cardington. It would be triangulated track facilitating the traffic coming from the Northampton route (also doubles as a reverser for steam locos).

I just feel there is a need to make MKC a through station rather than a terminus.

I don't see how its in the best interests of MKC to be a terminus. It means splitting the trains between 2 schedules from Oxford for a start, when in my plan you can have the same train doing the whole job.

The way its explained by the EWR it means some concessions are unavoidable.

 

[richieb1971]

Attached is a little map.

 

[The Planner]

I certainly agree that Bedford-Northampton is a good idea, because it combines the advantages of being a useful and straightforward workaround for the problem of both MK and Bedford being awkwardly off to one side of the EW route rather than directly on it, and of extra connectivity in its own right for journeys where EWR of itself provides little improvement. Not only for passenger journeys; it plus Bedford-Cambridge would give a route from Felixstowe to DIRFT that avoids the WCML altogether.

Like I have said a few times, you need to convince Northampton council then as we have sold off the vast majority of the Brackmills branch as Northampton council wanted the land for development. Re-opening Northampton to Bedford is pretty much a dead duck. There is also next to no East Anglia traffic to DIRFT anyway, it's all London Gateway/Purfleet/Tilbury traffic.

 

[mr_jrt]

I agree Luton to Hitchin/Stevenage is a great idea...just not as part of the main EWR scheme.

Shame about the busway though...as EWR from Bletchley via Leighton Buzzard and Dunstable to Luton, thence onward to the ECML (with an underground station under the airport) would be a useful service (and wouldn't consume capacity on the MML).

...and would end all this talk about abandoning Bedford at a stroke.

 

[richieb1971]

Like I have said a few times, you need to convince Northampton council then as we have sold off the vast majority of the Brackmills branch as Northampton council wanted the land for development. Re-opening Northampton to Bedford is pretty much a dead duck. There is also next to no East Anglia traffic to DIRFT anyway, it's all London Gateway/Purfleet/Tilbury traffic.

The railway doesn't need to go all the way to Northampton. Perhaps it could join up where the old track bed is just outside of Northampton or turn off after Wolverton. Cutting a few miles out of the equation will just make the route faster.

It is very short sighted to sell the land at this stage, but I admit its the EWR's fault. I feel there is a lack of vision of possibilities. But maybe they are keeping their plans close to their chest because no matter what they choose I feel there will be fighting going on all over the place. Railways and nuclear waste are pretty much at the same level of taboo these days.

 

[A0wen]

Like I have said a few times, you need to convince Northampton council then as we have sold off the vast majority of the Brackmills branch as Northampton council wanted the land for development. Re-opening Northampton to Bedford is pretty much a dead duck. There is also next to no East Anglia traffic to DIRFT anyway, it's all London Gateway/Purfleet/Tilbury traffic.

Not only that - the journey times on the Northampton - Bedford route would make it a ludicrously long diversion for EWR.

With the Marston Vale line upgraded - there is absolutely NO point in replacing Northampton - Bedford.

And any traffic to DIRFT wouldn't benefit from Northampton - Bedford, when it could be routed via Marston Vale and the slows from Bletchley.

I can't believe any sane individual is still touting the reinstatement of Northampton - Bedford, particularly as part of EWR.

 

[Trog]

Assuming that includes my comments on platform extensions, then you are quite right that I don't care. The situation - that we could have on one side of the fence a few guys with a digger and a possession building a square lump, while a few yards away on the other side some other guys could be building a whole bunch of houses for less money - is so patently ridiculous that the arguments can be rejected unheard because they lead to an unreasonable result. It is those arguments which are the true "wibble", and the true "clueless" are those who do not recognise them as such.

I think that just about proves DarloRich right, there is a lot more to working close to the track than having a possession to do it in. If you don't know what you are doing people can end up very dead very quickly, or you can create a hugely expensive maintenance liability for the future.

 

[Class 170101]

When the bridge collapsed a couple of years ago some freight run through Dullingham and turned at Cambridge so would perhaps do again, not ideal but better than nowt

There is quite a severe gauge restriction on the Cambridge to Chippenham Jn section of route due to Newmarket Tunnel. I believe it may be W8 Containers maximum.

 

[richieb1971]

Got reply from Caryl Jones, the communications manager of the EWR regarding 2 questions. If the Bucks newspaper was correct on the delay of the opening of the line and if there is any news on the Central section.

There is nothing further to update on Central Section route options since March. The work to identify a preferred route is complex and will take some time, but we expect to have a preferred corridor identified by the end of the year. There may be an interim update on progress in late June following a meeting of the Central Section working group, but I cannot pre-empt what this update might cover. When there is ‘news’ I will post this on the website and send an email to subscribers.

The newspaper article is accurate. When support and funding for the Western Section was announced by Government in July 2012, the target date for completion was given as December 2017. Network Rail were tasked with delivering the work in the five-year spending period April 2014 to March 2019. They published their delivery plan on 31st March 2014 and committed to deliver East West Rail Western Section by March 2019. This is not a two-year delay, but rather Network Rail gave a commitment to deliver 15 months later than the original target date.



There are no other delays that are not documented on the website. The current situation is that we await confirmation of the final scope for the scheme, which will include enhancements proposed by the Department for Transport (including electrification) over and above the original scheme promoted by the East West Rail Consortium. This should be confirmed by September 2015, if not earlier.



The plan is for EWR services to start in March 2019, and the line between Oxford and Bletchley will be electrified at the same time as the re-construction and upgrading of the line. We therefore can expect a diesel service to operate to Bedford before the Bedford Bletchley section is electrified, which may not happen until 2021 – the date has yet to be confirmed.



I hope that helps.



Kind regards

Caryl





Caryl Jones

Communications Manager - East West Rail Consortium

 

[DarloRich]

"Assuming that includes my comments on platform extensions, then you are quite right that I don't care. The situation - that we could have on one side of the fence a few guys with a digger and a possession building a square lump, while a few yards away on the other side some other guys could be building a whole bunch of houses for less money - is so patently ridiculous that the arguments can be rejected unheard because they lead to an unreasonable result. It is those arguments which are the true "wibble", and the true "clueless" are those who do not recognise them as such.

Whilst I understand you are an expert and no doubt correct in all you say please do try to have a little think about what might be different between the two environments and then let us have the benefit of your expertise.

After all us mere mortals may learn something.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I can't believe any sane individual is still touting the reinstatement of Northampton - Bedford, particularly as part of EWR.

They are not - it is the preserve of local hobby horse riders. The use of the existing route makes the line to Bedford feasible which then helps to make the case for the Bedford - Cambridge section.

 

[sammorris]

...and most people on here seem to want a Luton - Stevenage link.

I wouldn't say I want a Luton-Stevenage link - I want an East-West route, but realistically unless it can be sold as a "high speed airport link" or similar, politicians are just not going to be interested. I would see the ideal route as Bedford to St Neots, entering Cambridge from the north, more-or-less as mr_jrt has suggested on here (although it would mean freight having to reverse to reach Felixstowe). But I just can't see such a route being supported, given the likely cost and lack of airport connections.

You're right that Luton-Stevenage direct would be very tough - steep terrain, implacably hostile (and mostly wealthy, mostly retired and mostly Conservative) local opinion. It would basically have to be the Luton-Stevenage tunnel.

But maybe a more realistic and politically popular route would be from north of Luton to just north of Hitchin (roughly via Barton-le-Clay), joining onto the ECML and existing route from Hitchin to Cambridge. For Luton-Stevenage journeys it would be far from direct, but it would probably still be faster than the very slow and congested road link. You could extend Thameslink and/or Hertford Loop services around it to provide local service, running alongside longer distance EWR services via the Stewartby Chord, and a potentially wide variety of trains going to or between airports to excite politicians (via a new chord south of Cambridge).

It would be a fairly flat alignment, and Barton-le-Clay would probably find a station appealing whereas Kimpton would see the line as a mortal threat... admittedly it would do nothing to connect Bedford to northern ECML destinations, but then one line can't do everything, and there is the possibility of the Manton Curve.

 

[muddythefish]

Like I have said a few times, you need to convince Northampton council then as we have sold off the vast majority of the Brackmills branch as Northampton council wanted the land for development. Re-opening Northampton to Bedford is pretty much a dead duck. There is also next to no East Anglia traffic to DIRFT anyway, it's all London Gateway/Purfleet/Tilbury traffic.

Very short sighted as most of the roads into Northampton from all points of the compass are overcrowded alot of the time. There needs to a strategic rethink at govt level over towns such as Northampton that are choked with traffic. The problem is not going to get any better and, as any sane person knows, building more roads that only make the problem worse is not a viable or desirable solution any more.

 

[richieb1971]

Opening up the Northampton-Bedford line does have its advantages.

Bedford is connected to the north west directly without changes.

It opens up diversion routes in both directions (if you include the Marston Vale)

You could easily get a circular service (Bedford, Northampton, MKC, Bedford)

MKC is no longer a terminus, as it stands its logistical location on the line is pretty bad and requires its own special service.

The A428 is designed as a village access road, its not designed as a dual carriageway, which if you look at the numbers of cars using it, thats what is needed.

Connecting Northampton to Bedford from the north of Bedford makes the EWR's life a bit easier since they can piggy back off each other if necessary. It keeps Bedford Midland in the loop.


I will agree that none of those justifies rebuilding the line on its own, but altogether, I think there is a case for it. Especially as doing it now will be the cheapest it will ever be. In 10 years time there may be new cases to justify its re-opening only to find that cost has doubled, houses are built all over the line etc. I've seen whats happened on the cycle path at Bedford. Its going to happen on the Northampton-Bedford line eventually. So its now or never really.

 

[Bald Rick]

So its now or never really.

Well there's the answer!

(Hint: not the first one)

 

[richieb1971]

Well at some stage when the land the line was on starts getting built on it should be reviewed again.

The Marston Vale line was threatened with closure at least 3 times in the past 50 years. Now its existence could play a pivotal role in the EWR.

If the Marston Vale did not exist currently the EWR might go through places like Luton and Stevenage and where would we be then

 

[A0wen]

Opening up the Northampton-Bedford line does have its advantages.

Bedford is connected to the north west directly without changes.
It opens up diversion routes in both directions (if you include the Marston Vale)
You could easily get a circular service (Bedford, Northampton, MKC, Bedford)
MKC is no longer a terminus, as it stands its logistical location on the line is pretty bad and requires its own special service.

There is no demand for a 'circular' Bedford - Northampton - MKC service.

EWR will improve the Bedford-MK offering, Northampton - MK is fine. That leaves Northampton - Bedford and there simply isn't the demand for a whole new line to provide that service.

The A428 is designed as a village access road, its not designed as a dual carriageway, which if you look at the numbers of cars using it, thats what is needed.

And dualling the A428 - even allowing for by-passes around places like Turvey, Lavendon and Brafield will be far cheaper than rebuilding the Bedford-Northampton line. Plus it will benefit places like Olney and Bozeat with improved links to Bedford and Northampton.

The A43 between Northampton and Kettering is going to be dualled in the next 5 or so years - the A428 will then be the one everyone looks at.

Connecting Northampton to Bedford from the north of Bedford makes the EWR's life a bit easier since they can piggy back off each other if necessary. It keeps Bedford Midland in the loop.

At excessive cost. It would be cheaper to either reverse at the existing Bedford Midland station or provide a new Bedford station that links both lines.

I will agree that none of those justifies rebuilding the line on its own, but altogether, I think there is a case for it. Especially as doing it now will be the cheapest it will ever be. In 10 years time there may be new cases to justify its re-opening only to find that cost has doubled, houses are built all over the line etc. I've seen whats happened on the cycle path at Bedford. Its going to happen on the Northampton-Bedford line eventually. So its now or never really.

It's never. There simply isn't the demand. It doesn't give Northampton better services where they are needed i.e. faster journey times to London or Birmingham. It doesn't provide Bedford with additional capacity to London. It doesn't improve the links between Bedford and the East Mids. There isn't even a freight demand for it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Very short sighted as most of the roads into Northampton from all points of the compass are overcrowded alot of the time. There needs to a strategic rethink at govt level over towns such as Northampton that are choked with traffic. The problem is not going to get any better and, as any sane person knows, building more roads that only make the problem worse is not a viable or desirable solution any more.

The reason for that congestion is that Northampton actually needs a fully functioning ring road. The problem at the moment is virtually all the routes take you through the centre - which combined with the endless number of traffic lights and pedestrian crossings means what should be easy journeys frequently aren't.

Many of the people aren't heading to the centre of Northampton - which is why the train isn't the answer - because anyone heading for Duston, Moulton, Weston Favell, Swan Valley etc will tell you the station is too far away to be of practical use.

 

[richieb1971]

And just about everything you have said puts railways in a disadvantaged position. All your arguments could be used against every single proposed railway in the world. You could argue "Just build more roads, Job done".

Hmm, lets see... How many streets are currently jam packed with parked cars on the grass verges, how many streets are now one way because there is a line of parked cars down either side of the road?

Railways are supposed to be the solution to taking cars off the road, or one of them.

Not many people see the bigger picture. But I for one see a country where we do not have the capacity for cars in many areas. Building more roads only helps in one aspect of the problem.

 

[CdBrux]

Sometime rail will be the answer, sometimes (and hopefully decreasingly) roads, sometimes something else like bus priority. In 40 years the majority of cars could well be electric or mostly electric and self driving, maybe that would change how many people would view transport priorities?

Railyways are one solution to taking people of the road, in some cases they will be the best but not, by far, in all cases. I think the majority of people who read these boards would be in favour of rail investment where it is the best case, or where the two are close. To win over more people to that way of thinking only those cases can be seriously brought forward and I will be interested to see if the central part of EWR can find such a case in its examining of the options or not. As has been mentioned a direct Bedford -> Cambridge route seems good for longer distances, but lacking in benefits for more local traffic and the reverse is true for a Luton / Stevenage area alignment and so already we see a problem. This before considering construction costs.

But lets hope for something positive and that would have a case that puts it towards the top of any priority list when we get that report by the end of the year.

 

[quantinghome]

And just about everything you have said puts railways in a disadvantaged position. All your arguments could be used against every single proposed railway in the world. You could argue "Just build more roads, Job done".

Hmm, lets see... How many streets are currently jam packed with parked cars on the grass verges, how many streets are now one way because there is a line of parked cars down either side of the road?

Railways are supposed to be the solution to taking cars off the road, or one of them.

Not many people see the bigger picture. But I for one see a country where we do not have the capacity for cars in many areas. Building more roads only helps in one aspect of the problem.

Railways will only help reduce traffic if they meet a demand, which as A0wen has pointed out in this case, there isn't.

 

[richieb1971]

Thanks for all your comments above.

2 years ago I went to Basingstoke and spent a day there. A 2 car unit from Reading went back and forth all day long. And it was PACKED each and every time. I even filmed it I was so gob smacked.

I can't believe that the size of those 2 places is disproportionate to MKC and Bedford, Northampton and Bedford, MKC and Northampton etc. I believe that if such a service existed and it was good, people would use the service daily.

I keep hearing this word "demand". As I said when Henry Ford was asked what people wanted they said "A Faster horse".

I'm started to think that railways just aren't competitive. At least in this country. We are becoming more American in that socialistic travel doesn't make sense until its the last resort.