Chiltern's plan to re-open BMW line to passenger traffic

[Cherry_Picker]

News items on today's BBC Oxford News - available on Iplayer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04n5npd/bbc-oxford-news-05112014

Nice to see the big man (Shooter) involved. I kinda miss him being around with day to day stuff at Chiltern.

 

[The Planner]

What work would need doing to the route (other than stations obviously!)

Not a huge amount, I doubt the linespeed would be increased much if at all as it isnt a great distance from Kennington down to Blackbird Leys, only about 2 miles. The only major obstacle is the signalling as its token based. If some arrangement can be sorted out so any BMW train is "locked in" on arrival then I doubt a lot would be done there either.

 

[MarkyT]

What work would need doing to the route (other than stations obviously!)

At the moment the line is operated under a NST token system. I don't think there's a remote instrument for lock-in at Cowley. The line is not fitted with AWS.

The line is about 4 km from Kennington Junction to a notional station site at Cowley just before the factory at the Watlington Road bridge. A return trip should be able to make a round tour of the branch easily within a half hour cycle with a reasonable terminal layover. The manual token exchange system could be used subject to some associated changes to signalling:

A proper shut-in arrangement with remote token instrument at Cowley so a locomotive can be engaged in shunting activity within the factory sidings whilst a passenger train is running elsewhere on the branch.

Fitting of full AWS and TPWS at all signals, stop boards and distant warning boards

The main problem for passenger trains under that token scenario is the time consuming and archaic neccessity to make a stop in either direction to pick up and drop off tokens at Kennington Junction. The provision of additional remote instruments at Oxford station (like Worcester for single line to Evesham) would not be beneficial as that would add the running time to and from Oxford to the single line occupancy.

The main problem for freight trains under the token scenario is the high single line path utilisation by the passenger service, leaving no real capacity for freight during passenger running hours.

The solution is modern modular TCB signalling or it's ETCS successor using axle counters, together with a small track layout enhancement at Cowley. At Cowley the new platform would be built on a separate terminal track alongside a fully signalled freight reception/departure line connected thence into the factory sidings so freights can run quickly and easily during passenger terminal layover time. An additional signal block in each direction on the branch around the mid point could allow trains to follow each other fairly closely in the same direction along the single line.

An intermediate single platform station on the single line near Littlemore could be connected by foot and cycleways to both the village and the Science Park, also improving local pedestrian connectivity between the Science Park and surrounding settlements.

Here's a historical signalling notice showing the 1973 arrangements:

http://www.signallingnotices.org.uk/scans/280/1973 - LXO 132 Oxford Stage 2.pdf

I don't think much has changed at the Kennington end, but the signal box at Cowley was abolished subsequently along with the intermediate ground frame at Littlemore.

Oxford resignalling would be a great opportunity to convert the branch block system to something more modern than key tokens, even if not also carrying out the full track alterations at Cowley at the same time. Such a change could help streamline freight operations straight away without the passenger service, and the resignalling could passively provide for additional logical signal IDs, controller addresses, space on on the control screens etc. ready for subsequent changes to accommodate passenger trains. There may even be an opportunity for an interim hourly passenger service before those enhancements, the reduced service leaving some more substantial freight path slots during the day, which could be used more effectively without all the token faff.

 

[cle]

Might journey times/line speeds be better? What eventual frequency do people think viable - 2tph perhaps? Might that need a loop/two platform station midway?

 

[MarkyT]

Might journey times/line speeds be better? What eventual frequency do people think viable - 2tph perhaps? Might that need a loop/two platform station midway?

A small differential increase in speed for passenger DMU traffic might be possible without significant upgrade to the track. Nevertheless a one way 4 kilometer journey at 30KPH, within today's 25MPH limit, would only take about 8 minutes. Adding 1 minute either way for an intermediate stop and a 10 minute turnback layover at Cowley terminus gives a round trip of 28 minutes, leaving a margin of 2 minutes between conflicts at Kennington Junction in a half hourly interval service. To also run freight during the day, there would need to be a separate signalled freight reception road alongside the new terminal bay at Cowley, and an additional signal block in each direction on the single line in order to allow a freight to closely follow then pass a passenger from Kennington Junction to Cowley or allow a freight to exit the factory ahead of a passenger from Cowley during the terminal layover. Therefore for a half hourly service, even with freight, there's no need for an intermediate passing loop and both stations could be simple single platform construction.

 

[The Planner]

Will be interesting if they can shoe horn this into the Oxford resignalling as its fairly advanced and unless the funding comes from somewhere quickly it will cause problems. Im not sure the station would as far down as the Watlington Road either, more likely further back before the Tesco.

 

[Buttsy]

I can see a stop for the Science Park which would also serve Minchery Farm and the football ground (near the lane between the two at one end and Sanders Road at the other) and another that serves the Business Park and the north end of Blackbird Leys (somewhere around the old Greyhound/Speedway stadium).

 

[21C101]

The other obvious place for a new station is South Hinksey where the park and ride is near the A34 junction.

Looking at the map an extension to the A40 is well and truly blocked with the bat infested tunnel, housing and hill making alternatives unfeasible.

However a future "phase 2" could build a mile of new alignment swinging right below the minor road to Hill Farm, then roughly following Cuddesden Brook to the sluice then swinging north to M40 Junction 8a.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

The Bats can be removed, they've done it on the Oxford - Bicester - Marylebone section or East - West rail section.

 

[The Planner]

Thats a massive hill on that side and as we have said plenty of times its a non starter for anything to go past Cowley towards Thame.

 

[21C101]

Thats a massive hill on that side and as we have said plenty of times its a non starter for anything to go past Cowley towards Thame.

The 1:50,000 map shows a spot height on the road next to where the bufferstops at Cowley are of 79m. The railway is on an embankment at this point.

South of the hill farm road the hill is between 110 and 115m high at max.

So it has to climb approx 30 metres or 90 feet over a mile (much less if in cutting/tunnel, and fall about 50 metres over about two miles the other side to reach M40 Junction 8a by the route I suggested.

Easily possible in engineering terms, although a short tunnel may be preferable to a cutting for environmental reasons.

In comparison, the Baldock bypass, a 6.5 km dual carriageway road with eight major structures and a 230m dual carriageway twin bore cut and cover tunnel cost £43 million in 2006.

 

[HarleyDavidson]

It's amazing that they'll quite happily spend mega bucks on a road project, yet when it comes to reopening a railway which would provide serious benefits to a wide area the answer is NO.

Makes you wonder whether that the RHA is in charge of the finances & remuneration of the minions & ministers at DaFT.

 

[Bald Rick]

The 1:50,000 map shows a spot height on the road next to where the bufferstops at Cowley are of 79m. The railway is on an embankment at this point.

South of the hill farm road the hill is between 110 and 115m high at max.

So it has to climb approx 30 metres or 90 feet over a mile (much less if in cutting/tunnel, and fall about 50 metres over about two miles the other side to reach M40 Junction 8a by the route I suggested.

Easily possible in engineering terms, although a short tunnel may be preferable to a cutting for environmental reasons.

In comparison, the Baldock bypass, a 6.5 km dual carriageway road with eight major structures and a 230m dual carriageway twin bore cut and cover tunnel cost £43 million in 2006.

But what would be the point? No one in their right mind would drive to that station site for a journey to anywhere but Oxford.

The existing park and ride at Thornhill has a 10-12 min frequency for most of the day, a 16 min journey time, £2 to park for the day and £2.70 return on the bus. It also offers a range of bus stops in Central Oxford. The only way the train could get close to that price / convenience offer is with a big subsidy. On top of the millions to build it.

 

[cle]

A small differential increase in speed for passenger DMU traffic might be possible without significant upgrade to the track. Nevertheless a one way 4 kilometer journey at 30KPH, within today's 25MPH limit, would only take about 8 minutes. Adding 1 minute either way for an intermediate stop and a 10 minute turnback layover at Cowley terminus gives a round trip of 28 minutes, leaving a margin of 2 minutes between conflicts at Kennington Junction in a half hourly interval service. To also run freight during the day, there would need to be a separate signalled freight reception road alongside the new terminal bay at Cowley, and an additional signal block in each direction on the single line in order to allow a freight to closely follow then pass a passenger from Kennington Junction to Cowley or allow a freight to exit the factory ahead of a passenger from Cowley during the terminal layover. Therefore for a half hourly service, even with freight, there's no need for an intermediate passing loop and both stations could be simple single platform construction.

Could 40mph be achieved for much of it? Not high speed by any means, but 25mph max would be quite frustrating for a whole journey. Thinking in terms of a single unit operating both with decent turnarounds - you'd ideally want more at Oxford for delays.

So 8 mins journey (including a stop), 6 at Cowley, 8 back, 8 at Oxford - and off again... ?

 

[MarkyT]

Could 40mph be achieved for much of it? Not high speed by any means, but 25mph max would be quite frustrating for a whole journey. Thinking in terms of a single unit operating both with decent turnarounds - you'd ideally want more at Oxford for delays.

So 8 mins journey (including a stop), 6 at Cowley, 8 back, 8 at Oxford - and off again... ?

40MPH for passenger DMUs with freights remaining limited to 25 should be possible. I think Chiltern wish to extend their Oxford Terminators from Marylebone via Bicester rather than run an isolated shuttle. the Cowley layover needs to be as long as possible to absorb any delay picked up all the way from Marylebone, and also to allow freights to run between the passengers workings during the day.

I've drawn a schematic here:
http://www.townend.me/files/cowley.pdf

 

[Class 170101]

But is there space at Oxford on the through platforms and at Oxford North Jn to accommodate Chiltern services to Cowley?

 

[MarkyT]

But is there space at Oxford on the through platforms and at Oxford North Jn to accommodate Chiltern services to Cowley?

There is a proposal to rebuild Oxford station with more platforms I understand. We discussed it on here I recall.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?p=1863269

 

[21C101]

But is there space at Oxford on the through platforms and at Oxford North Jn to accommodate Chiltern services to Cowley?

I suspect the key issue is conflicts between northbound trains coming off the Cowley branch and southbound trains to Didcot.

Has the idea of reopening a separate single line on the LNW trackbed from Oxford to the Bletchley line junction been canned?

 

[Buttsy]

Another possibility would have been to extend the up bi-di loop south of platform one at Oxford to link up with the loop at Hinksey that leads onto the branch, so that these services could run down to Oxford without having to cross the up twice. Issues would be sufficient capacity at Oxford P1 (current layout) to allow for a 30 min service onto the Jericho loop and extending the loops (new metal signal equipment platforms have been built on the possible alignment between Hinksey [between A423 and Redbridge overbridges] and Pembroke College Sports Ground footbridge). This alignment would allow for a Redbridge P&R station as well separate from the mainline.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Has the idea of reopening a separate single line on the LNW trackbed from Oxford to the Bletchley line junction been canned?

I believe it has for the Evergreen project - may get revived with Oxford North resignalling & East- West.

 

[The Planner]

Evergreen and EW phase 1 are the same now so the independant line is dead.

 

[Buttsy]

Evergreen and EW phase 1 are the same now so the independant line is dead.

Fairly dos

 

[cle]

40MPH for passenger DMUs with freights remaining limited to 25 should be possible. I think Chiltern wish to extend their Oxford Terminators from Marylebone via Bicester rather than run an isolated shuttle. the Cowley layover needs to be as long as possible to absorb any delay picked up all the way from Marylebone, and also to allow freights to run between the passengers workings during the day.

I've drawn a schematic here:
http://www.townend.me/files/cowley.pdf

Won't they (inevitably very popular) trains from Marylebone end up being 5-8 cars one day?

 

[Andyjs247]

Nice to see the big man (Shooter) involved. I kinda miss him being around with day to day stuff at Chiltern.

40MPH for passenger DMUs with freights remaining limited to 25 should be possible. I think Chiltern wish to extend their Oxford Terminators from Marylebone via Bicester rather than run an isolated shuttle. the Cowley layover needs to be as long as possible to absorb any delay picked up all the way from Marylebone, and also to allow freights to run between the passengers workings during the day.

Won't they (inevitably very popular) trains from Marylebone end up being 5-8 cars one day?

I would imagine such a service would be very popular. And with the backing of Chiltern I'd say it's a lot more credible than some of the transport schemes that have been banded around lately (thinking of the county council's idea to run buses in tunnels underneath Oxford city centre - can't see that ever happening).

Running through to the Cowley branch from Marylebone would also have the advantage of not tying up platform space in Oxford for any length of time. (Are there going to be any bay platforms post remodelling?) My own feeling is that running through from Banbury or the North Cotswolds line might be preferable, but fair play to Chiltern for taking this project forward.

As an aside, it might be a tad confusing for the uninitiated with the train stopping at Oxford Parkway - Oxford - Oxford Science Park - Oxford Business Park in succession. Not the most direct routing by any means (trivia: a train from Marylebone would actually turn through 360° en route without reversing) but considering the state of road traffic in Oxford this initiative is surely welcome.

 

[MarkyT]

Running through to the Cowley branch from Marylebone would also have the advantage of not tying up platform space in Oxford for any length of time. (Are there going to be any bay platforms post remodelling?) My own feeling is that running through from Banbury or the North Cotswolds line might be preferable, but fair play to Chiltern for taking this project forward.

The station development masterplan is illustrated here:
http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Library/Documents/Planning/Station Masterplan Map.pdf

and there is a nice video animation fly-through here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAXwIxMSwBI&feature=youtu.be

These appear to show a station with two islands providing four through platforms in total together with an additional side platform for Chiltern on the east side shown as a terminal bay. I propose extending this latter line as a through platform which together with a a third track all the way through to Kennington Junction would form a kind of right hand running contraflow lane for Cowley to Bicester trains whilst the opposing direction on this axis could slot in amongst the FGW /XC Up trains on the Up line and through the regular island platform tracks for that direction. This is illustrated by the new second page accompanying my original schematic here:
http://www.townend.me/files/cowley.pdf (new v3)

 

[mr_jrt]

With the new directional island platforms, are the through lines needed? Moving the eastern island westwards (i.e. leaving just the two tracks separating it from the remaining island platform) would leave room for the new southbound loop platform line, and the space gained on the east of the formation would then make a 3rd island for the relief lines possible, giving the Chiltern route a passing loop at the station, and it would future proof any later capacity enhancements quite nicely. Of course, you could do this without removing the through lines, but it would reduce the amount of land required on the eastern side if they were to go.

...and the type of future capacity improvements I'm talking about are of course reinstating the independent line from Bicester down through the station and down to the Cowley branch. It would also give options should relief lines ever get extended from Didcot in the future...I have read in the mists of time the GWR wanted to rebuild the station as a 8 platform monster, and I can only presume this would have been looped platforms for each of the 4 lines envisioned to have been extended there. Building 6 of those shouldn't be too bad

 

[The Planner]

People need to distance the masterplan to what is actually happening at Oxford. The only thing the resignalling and remodelling is providing is the new down platform. You will need through lines as otherwise where are you recessing the intermodals?

 

[mr_jrt]

People need to distance the masterplan to what is actually happening at Oxford. The only thing the resignalling and remodelling is providing is the new down platform. You will need through lines as otherwise where are you recessing the intermodals?

OK, I was under the impression the freights would want to sail through, not stop and wait for paths, hence being able to run through the unoccupied platform for each direction. If you wanted somewhere for them to wait though, surely in the middle of a station is a silly place to do it? Why not continue the platform loops for a stretch of 4 tracks, with the passenger services effectively just using the outer lines as they do now, and the recessing lines would then be well away from the platforms, reducing the alignment width needed, abet fed from the platform loops?

Might knock up a diagram to illustrate what I mean...

 

[67018]

OK, I was under the impression the freights would want to sail through, not stop and wait for paths, hence being able to run through the unoccupied platform for each direction. If you wanted somewhere for them to wait though, surely in the middle of a station is a silly place to do it? Why not continue the platform loops for a stretch of 4 tracks, with the passenger services effectively just using the outer lines as they do now, and the recessing lines would then be well away from the platforms, reducing the alignment width needed, abet fed from the platform loops?

Might knock up a diagram to illustrate what I mean...

I was under the impression that this was what is currently being done - to convert the through lines into freight loops. I'm sure someone in the know will be along shortly to put me right though!

 

[The Planner]

It is what is being done, the through lines will be dumping grounds and the passengers use the loops. You can't always make the freights sail through, they still get caught up.

 

[D1009]

It is what is being done, the through lines will be dumping grounds and the passengers use the loops. You can't always make the freights sail through, they still get caught up.

I always thought Oxford was one of the few places away from 4 track areas where freight trains actually overtake passenger trains frequently.