Peterborough to get Flyover

[Aictos]

Looks Network Rail has proposals for either a tunnel/dive under/flyover at Werrington Junction to remove conflict movements of freight to and from the GE/GN route to the ECML.

This was reported in the local newspaper here

Mods' note: the link no longer works. See Clip's post (#2) below for the text. This is one of the reasons why our Forum Rules require articles to be quoted!

 

[Clip]

For those on phones/screen readers

Multi-million pound plans are being drawn up for a major engineering project in Peterborough to get more trains and passengers on to the railway.


The venture by Network Rail may involve a rail flyover or a tunnel under the East Coast Main Line at its Werrington junction.

The aim will be to create greater separation between the slow freight trains and the high speed passenger services between London and Edinburgh.

Two exhibitions have been planned to gauge public reaction if Network Rail was to go ahead with the idea.

A Network Rail spokesman said: “This is still at a very early stage.

“There are a number of options, two of which could involve building either a flyover or a “dive under”.

“It would be a major piece of engineering at the Werrington junction where the East Coast line meets the Great Northern/Great Eastern line that goes out towards Lincoln and Doncaster.

“If it goes ahead it would allow us to build in more capacity on the East Coast Mainline.”

If the proposal, which has been under consideration for some years, does go ahead it will be the latest in a series of improvements to rail services in Peterborough.

Last year, Network Rail spent £43 million installing new and longer platforms plus others works at Peterborough. A further £3.3 million was spent by Network Rail and East Coast improving the station concourse. More than four million people travel from Peterborough railway station a year.

 

[Aictos]

My only thought is IF this does go ahead and the junction is grade seperated, would we see MORE freight sent via Lincoln and if so would this mean more paths for InterCity services via Grantham?

Not to mention the fact that more trains would surely mean longer opening hours of the signalboxes as they're only open a few hours a day if that on the GN/GE line.

 

[petersi]

Not to mention the fact that more trains would surely mean longer opening hours of the signalboxes as they're only open a few hours a day if that on the GN/GE line.

The line is being resignalled controlled from Lincoln. (info from Wikipedia)

 

[NotATrainspott]

My only thought is IF this does go ahead and the junction is grade seperated, would we see MORE freight sent via Lincoln and if so would this mean more paths for InterCity services via Grantham?

Not to mention the fact that more trains would surely mean longer opening hours of the signalboxes as they're only open a few hours a day if that on the GN/GE line.

I believe that would be the intention. Network Rail want as much freight moved to the GN/GE joint line as possible and they've been upgrading that line to cope.

 

[muddythefish]

Hitchin, Doncaster, Peterborough...gradually all the East Coast bottlenecks are being removed. Is it too much to hope that Welwyn will be 4-tracked and FCC passengers are no longer held at signals at Woolmer Green Junction ?

 

[dk1]

Hitchin, Doncaster, Peterborough...gradually all the East Coast bottlenecks are being removed. Is it too much to hope that Welwyn will be 4-tracked and FCC passengers are no longer held at signals at Woolmer Green Junction ?

I think that is a bridge too far. Probably sight HS2 as some sort of relief but if traffic keeps growing who knows?

 

[ianhr]

Hitchin, Doncaster, Peterborough...gradually all the East Coast bottlenecks are being removed. Is it too much to hope that Welwyn will be 4-tracked and FCC passengers are no longer held at signals at Woolmer Green Junction ?

I am surprised that there has not yet been a proposal to put a flyover at Newark to take the Nottingham-Lincoln trains over the ECML and eliminate the flat crossing. I would have thought that this would be one of the simpler flyover schemes to implement as it could be straight, eliminate expensive to maintain double diamonds and make it possible to raise a PSR, in addition to removing conflicting paths.

 

[swt_passenger]

I am surprised that there has not yet been a proposal to put a flyover at Newark to take the Nottingham-Lincoln trains over the ECML and eliminate the flat crossing. I would have thought that this would be one of the simpler flyover schemes to implement as it could be straight, eliminate expensive to maintain double diamonds and make it possible to raise a PSR, in addition to removing conflicting paths.

There is a proposal to do that - it's covered in the last Midlands RUS - and they expect to need it whenever service frequencies are increased on the east/west route over the crossing. According to the latest version of the ECML RUS (the 2016 capacity addendum), it is not a constraint in operating the ECML timetable, even with the planned 2016 extra paths.

Going back to the original point, a flyover at this site has been in NR's plans for at least 5 or 6 years, the potential for 'grade separation' of Werrington Jn was mentioned in the 2009 version of the CP4 enhancement plans - so the paper is not really writing about brand new 'news', just the latest stage in a very long process, where they actually get the public involved...

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I am surprised that there has not yet been a proposal to put a flyover at Newark to take the Nottingham-Lincoln trains over the ECML and eliminate the flat crossing. I would have thought that this would be one of the simpler flyover schemes to implement as it could be straight, eliminate expensive to maintain double diamonds and make it possible to raise a PSR, in addition to removing conflicting paths.

I remember reading about a scheme to remove the flat crossing years ago, though it was in 'RAIL' IIRC so it may have been pure speculation...

It does seem strange that the remaining flat crossing (WHR Porthmadog notwithstanding!) is on one of the principal main lines in the country in 2014.

 

[asylumxl]

I think that is a bridge too far. Probably sight HS2 as some sort of relief but if traffic keeps growing who knows?

No pun intended.

There are so many issues surrounding the Welwyn Viaduct, I doubt it's going to be fixed any time soon. There was a thread about it a while back.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I did propose a new line from Kings Dyke to Peakirk - largely brownfield and peripheral Peterborough which would have solved this rebuilding of PBO and neatly bypass East Anglia freight via the GN/GE Joint line. A very senior NR manager quite liked it - but he has recently retired. It ought to be looked at again. It was walked , mapped and costed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Forget March- Wisbech - route lost for ever , and longer than the above proposal ....

 

[HowardGWR]

I did propose a new line from Kings Dyke to Peakirk - largely brownfield and peripheral Peterborough which would have solved this rebuilding of PBO and neatly bypass East Anglia freight via the GN/GE Joint line. A very senior NR manager quite liked it - but he has recently retired. It ought to be looked at again. It was walked , mapped and costed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Forget March- Wisbech - route lost for ever , and longer than the above proposal ....

You mean March to Spalding surely?

 

[Welshman]

I am surprised that there has not yet been a proposal to put a flyover at Newark to take the Nottingham-Lincoln trains over the ECML and eliminate the flat crossing. I would have thought that this would be one of the simpler flyover schemes to implement as it could be straight, eliminate expensive to maintain double diamonds and make it possible to raise a PSR, in addition to removing conflicting paths.

Wasn't there something recently about the difficulty in constructing the necessary gradients on the Nottingham-Lincoln line for a flyover due to the proximity of the A46 Newark by-pass and for a dive-under due to the proximity of the River Trent?

Or am I just imagining this?

 

[Tobbes]

March - Spalding a great loss, it is now clear. With increasing intermodals from Harwich/Felixstowe, any routing to keep them away from the ECML south of Doncaster must be welcomed. In this sense, grade separating Werrington Junction is something of a red herring because ideally you'd not have the freight at PBO anyway.

 

[edwin_m]

At least the new Peterborough station layout provides more capacity there, which would probably have been needed even if March-Spalding was still open. It's probably just moved the pinch point down the line to Werrington though.

 

[Bald Rick]

Hitchin, Doncaster, Peterborough...gradually all the East Coast bottlenecks are being removed. Is it too much to hope that Welwyn will be 4-tracked and FCC passengers are no longer held at signals at Woolmer Green Junction ?

I can guarantee that no FCC service will be held at Woolmer Green Jn from 14 September onwards. But yes it is too much to hope for 4 tracking.

 

[Tomnick]

It'll be interesting to see what happens when there's an FCC train approaching the junction on each of the Up Fast and Up Slow at the same time then .

Is there to be some sort of change to the regulating policies on 14th Sept, or something more obvious?

 

[deltic08]

Any enthusiastic amateur knows that reinstating 19 miles of March-Spalding is a no brainer for intermodal traffic and increasing capacity on the ECML. £150-£170M should sort it. Value for money compared to other schemes such as saving two minutes at Watford costing £81M.

 

[Starmill]

Any enthusiastic amateur knows that reinstating 19 miles of March-Spalding is a no brainer for intermodal traffic and increasing capacity on the ECML. £150-£170M should sort it. Value for money compared to other schemes such as saving two minutes at Watford costing £81M.

True, but... isn't the latter kind of necessary to stop it from, you know... falling apart?

Can I also ask; was it March - Wisbech - Spalding? Or March - Spalding and Wisbech on another route?

 

[krus_aragon]

It'll be interesting to see what happens when there's an FCC train approaching the junction on each of the Up Fast and Up Slow at the same time then .

Is there to be some sort of change to the regulating policies on 14th Sept, or something more obvious?

There is an obvious change on the 14th of September which will mean it's no longer FCC's problem...

 

[Tomnick]

D'oh...that's what I meant by something more obvious then .

 

[cle]

True, but... isn't the latter kind of necessary to stop it from, you know... falling apart?

Can I also ask; was it March - Wisbech - Spalding? Or March - Spalding and Wisbech on another route?

No Wisbech probably. It'd need to be wired as part of the suggested electric spine extension to Felixstowe in CP6.

After that, Newark would definitely be next. Possibly Morpeth if HS2 takes that route in many moons time. But Welwyn will definitely be last!

 

[CalderRail]

I am surprised that there has not yet been a proposal to put a flyover at Newark to take the Nottingham-Lincoln trains over the ECML and eliminate the flat crossing. I would have thought that this would be one of the simpler flyover schemes to implement as it could be straight, eliminate expensive to maintain double diamonds and make it possible to raise a PSR, in addition to removing conflicting paths.

There are conflicting infrastructure & geography problems with doing that on that allignment. The proximity of two major A roads, a major river & a station cause issues.

You can see for yourself easily just by looking at the map:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place...479,2290m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m2!3m1!1s0x0:0x0

 

[Aictos]

I can guarantee that no FCC service will be held at Woolmer Green Jn from 14 September onwards. But yes it is too much to hope for 4 tracking.

Just like no FCCs will be held at Fletton Junction from 01:59 on 14th September onwards - one solution to Digswell Viaduct could be to have passing loops at Gordon Hill within the station limits and send stuff that way as off peak it's only a hourly service north of Hertford so surely more paths can be used?

As to the Werrington Flyover, IF all freight towards Doncaster ran via Lincoln vice Grantham, how many long distance paths would this create?

 

[joeykins82]

Isn't it the plan that the bay platform at Stevenage will see some of the Hertford North services extended there (as well as the curtailment of services that had run through to Letchworth)?

 

[Aictos]

Isn't it the plan that the bay platform at Stevenage will see some of the Hertford North services extended there (as well as the curtailment of services that had run through to Letchworth)?

I think that is the plan, wonder if it would mean revising the existing timetable so one of the existing Hertford terminators off peak is extended to Stevenage making a half hourly service....

Anyway back on topic, wonder if it's going to be a flyover or a dive under at Werrington Jct???

 

[ac6000cw]

True, but... isn't the latter kind of necessary to stop it from, you know... falling apart?

Can I also ask; was it March - Wisbech - Spalding? Or March - Spalding and Wisbech on another route?

It was March - Spalding via French Drove & Cowbit. The Wisbech line originally continued on to a junction at Magdalen Road (the current Watlington station) with the Ely - Kings Lynn line.

 

[muddythefish]

Just like no FCCs will be held at Fletton Junction from 01:59 on 14th September onwards - one solution to Digswell Viaduct could be to have passing loops at Gordon Hill within the station limits and send stuff that way as off peak it's only a hourly service north of Hertford so surely more paths can be used?

As to the Werrington Flyover, IF all freight towards Doncaster ran via Lincoln vice Grantham, how many long distance paths would this create?

The Hertford loop is underused. I think there used to be an off peak hourly service Huntington - KX (from Huntingdon platform 1 bay) that went via Hertford years ago but I'm not certain. In view of off peak passenger growth on the line in recent years there's a need for a third Peterborough train and it could go that way. It also begs the question why Cambridge get 4 trains off peak to KX (in addition to Liverpool St trains) while Peterborough only gets 2.

 

[Lee_Again]

The Hertford loop is underused. I think there used to be an off peak hourly service Huntington - KX (from Huntingdon platform 1 bay) that went via Hertford years ago but I'm not certain. In view of off peak passenger growth on the line in recent years there's a need for a third Peterborough train and it could go that way. It also begs the question why Cambridge get 4 trains off peak to KX (in addition to Liverpool St trains) while Peterborough only gets 2.

I have long advocated a plan for this route that involves the following.

For the Loop...

• Increase stopping services to 4 tph (Primarily to make it easier to fit in 2tph services)
• 2 tph Moorgate 2tph NLL (via upgraded connection at Cannonbury)
• Add passing loops at Gordon Hill and Hertford (doesn't have to be at the station)
• The 2 Cambridge Fasts routed via Hertford (overtake stoppers at Gordon Hill)
• Two extra services as part of the new Thameslink Connection (possibly call at Hertford)

This would create at least two paths over the viaduct for faster ECML services.

I would also FORCE the Open Access guys to join the trains together. A 15 coach (3*5) super train with a portion to Hull/Bradford/Sunderland. These could split at a location (doesn't have to be a station) before the first scheduled stop. This could create an extra path as well as giving an hourly service from/to those destinations.

This would allow EC (or whoever) to run the following over the viaduct...

• 2 semi fasts to Leeds
• 1 Fast (non-stop) to Leeds
• 1 Fast to Newcastle/Edinburgh (1 stop only)
• 2 semi fast to Newcastle
• 1 other (Lincoln/Nottingham ??)

Plus the 4 FCC services. All this without a single change to the viaduct. I would seriously look at increasing the line speed. The 115mpg through the tunnels is a pain. It effectively stops 125mph running from Hatfield. Would probably save a minute or so per journey (and add further opportunity for paths).