East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

[swt_passenger]

I think it could work with EWR owning it all, and having access to NR's metals where needed. Let's face it, the opposite is already in place for Chiltern using LU's tracks, so I see no reason why a fully vertically-integrated EWR wouldn't run trains down over NR's infrastructure as and when - and vice-versa.

Could get a bit convoluted in terms of access agreements and fees, but then what part of operating a railway these days isn't?

The current plan includes extending an existing Chiltern service from Marylebone through to Milton Keynes though. So does that route just get 'taken' from Chiltern to justify vertical integration?

ISTM they haven't thought this through. The majority of the EWR services by mileage will run on existing tracks, especially once you've extended beyond Oxford to Didcot or Reading or wherever they happen to end up.

 

[MK Tom]

The current plan includes extending an existing Chiltern service from Marylebone through to Milton Keynes though. So does that route just get 'taken' from Chiltern to justify vertical integration?

ISTM they haven't thought this through. The majority of the EWR services by mileage will run on existing tracks, especially once you've extended beyond Oxford to Didcot or Reading or wherever they happen to end up.

Surely the Marylebone-MK service will just run over NR metals as far as Aylesbury? This will introduce competition between Marylebone and Princes Risborough (or High Wycombe). The Chiltern Main Line passing to EW-R makes no sense with Birmingham and Oxford services also using it. Also I don't think anything's been said to suggest this service will be an extension of an existing Chiltern service vs. a new service, although capacity limits on the Aylesbury branch assuming it isn't doubled will limit what can run, but I don't see the MK service stopping at Little Kimble and Monks Risborough.

This really isn't the complicated problem some seem to think it is. Trains run on other companies' infrastructure all the time on privatised railways. It happened constantly before grouping here.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Germany has a few micro-franchises with only a dozen or so trains on a branchline or two, so an EWR operator need not be enormous. As the line is reopened properly there will need to be an operator to run end-to-end radial journeys that just don't fit into any other operator. Traditional London operators can justify extending a service clockwise or anticlockwise to the next destination on the line (e.g. Chiltern to Oxford and Milton Keynes) but they're not going to go further.

The EWR operator would basically take on the role that XC does in regional services radiating from Birmingham, except from Milton Keynes. So long as a train runs along the EWR core it doesn't really seem to matter where it goes after that. You could plausibly see EWR services stretching all the way from Bristol or Southampton through to Norwich and Peterborough. Using 110mph bi-mode EMUs there would be few places in the South East where they couldn't go.

That they would also be responsible for maintaining the infrastructure almost seems irrelevant. Transport Scotland had tried to get the Borders Railway done as a design, build and maintain contract (just like road infrastructure is done these days), but in that case there would be no way to make it a separate franchise. Given that the EWR franchise and the infrastructure company would end up working so closely with one another anyway, it makes sense just to force them together to begin with.

 

[swt_passenger]

Also I don't think anything's been said to suggest this service will be an extension of an existing Chiltern service vs. a new service...

It most definitely has been said that Milton Keynes via Aylesbury will be an extension of the hourly Marylebone, this has been repeated regularly and consistently on the EWR website's proposed service patterns for a number of years, also shown in their FAQs.

Milton Keynes – Aylesbury – London Marylebone
One train per hour from Milton Keynes to London Marylebone as an extension of the existing Chiltern Railways services between Aylesbury Vale Parkway and London Marylebone with stops at Bletchley and Winslow. This service may stop at Princes Risborough and High Wycombe.

http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/freq...will run on East West Rail (Western Section)?

So the question remains, does this just get transferred to EWR from Chiltern? Do Chiltern get compensated?

 

[The Planner]

Will be a different franchise by then, you just write it out of the Chiltern one and people bid accordingly.

 

[MK Tom]

It most definitely has been said that Milton Keynes via Aylesbury will be an extension of the hourly Marylebone, this has been repeated regularly and consistently on the EWR website's proposed service patterns for a number of years, also shown in their FAQs.



So the question remains, does this just get transferred to EWR from Chiltern? Do Chiltern get compensated?

Yeah I've never taken that quote too literally because E-WR will route via High Wycombe and AVP services currently route via Amersham. There isn't quite an hourly service from Aylesbury via Wycombe at the moment and as I said I don't see MK services picking up the branch line stops so I'm interpreting that line as being poorly written and not literal.

Anyway my point was it has no bearing on the infrastructure element and just serves to create competition out of Marylebone, which as others have said will be worked into the next Chiltern franchise.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

I'm sceptical that EWR is going to be the sole TOC (or indeed a TOC at all) on the Oxford-Bletchley/Bedford line. Grayling's statement was very ambiguously worded and non-committal. My guess is that the Marylebone-Aylesbury service will remain with Chiltern, and that the Aylesbury-MK portion will either be Chiltern (most likely) or joint-worked with the EWR TOC.

 

[MikePJ]

"Purdah" has now ended following the local and General elections, and so the consultations have been announced for the Western Section phase 2 (i.e. Bicester-MK)

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-railway-upgrade-plan/key-projects/east-west-rail/western-section/

Location Date Time Address
Bicester 10 July 12-8pm John Paul II Centre, Henley House, The Causeway, OX26 6AW
Bletchley 11 July 12-8pm Scots Sports and Social Club, Selbourne Avenue, MK3 5BX
Winslow 12 July 12-8pm Public Hall, Elmfields Gate, MK18 3JG
Launton 13 July 12-8pm Sports and Social Club, Bicester Road, OX26 5DP
Waddeson 14 July 12-8pm Waddesdon Village Hall, Baker Street, HP18 0LQ
Newton Longville 17 July 3-7pm 2 Paradise, MK17 0AQ
Bedford 18 July 12-8pm Harpur Suite, St. Paul’s Square, MK40 1SJ
Marston Moretaine 19 July 12-8pm The Forest Centre, Station Road, MK43 0PR
Charndon 20 July 3-7pm Community Centre, Charndon Playing Fields, Steeple Claydon Road, OX27 0BL
Princes Risborough 21 July 12-8pm Elim Church@Risborough, 9 Bell Street, HP27 0DE

 

[jopsuk]

Hmm, I saw earlier today that some departments are interpreting that Purdah lasts for most purposes until the new government is actually formed by the passing of the Queen's Speach

 

[MikePJ]

Hmm, I saw earlier today that some departments are interpreting that Purdah lasts for most purposes until the new government is actually formed by the passing of the Queen's Speach

Civil servants are naturally cautious types!

 

[MarkRedon]

"Purdah" has now ended following the local and General elections, and so the consultations have been announced for the Western Section phase 2 (i.e. Bicester-MK)

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/our-railway-upgrade-plan/key-projects/east-west-rail/western-section/

The same consultation dates are now posted on the East West Rail website - see http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/2017/06/30/say-plans-transform-east-west-rail-services/ which reminds us that Phase 2 includes direct rail passenger services between Bedford and Oxford, Milton Keynes and Oxford, and Milton Keynes and London Marylebone via Aylesbury. Forum members might like to engage by various means including email:

How to engage:

There are a number of ways the public can have their say on the project.

Visit the websites: ewrconsultation.co.uk or www.networkrail.co.uk/east-west-rail

Download the free app for iPhone, iPad and Android phones and tablets
Email: ewrconsultation@networkrail.co.uk
Send a letter: FREEPOST EAST WEST RAIL CONSULTATION (must be in capitals)

 

[snowball]

From clicking on the icons it appears a lot of level crossings are to be retained. Some to be closed without a new bridge or with only a new footbridge. The only new road bridge seems to be at Manor Road, Kempston Hardwick. This is somewhat contrary to the impression I'd gained from stuff I'd read previously.

 

[The Planner]

£££££££

 

[Muzer]

Immensely disappointing to see confirmation that electrification is now not on the table.

 

[YorkshireBear]

The only hope is that any structures requiring work are made compliant, and the S&T and drainage records are accurate so that the OLE design is not as difficult!

 

[DarloRich]

Immensely disappointing to see confirmation that electrification is now not on the table.

while I agree (in part) that would not help with many of the proposed services and only makes sense as part of a wider scheme.

 

[eMeS]

Would I be correct in that NR in not offering overbridges in the Milton Keynes area, are hoping that Milton Keynes will have to fund them if they're considered necessary as a business case? e.g. that at Bow Brickhill Station, and at Woburn Sands.

 

[Muzer]

while I agree (in part) that would not help with many of the proposed services and only makes sense as part of a wider scheme.

Well, GWR to Oxford will hopefully be happening eventually (it only makes sense, after all), despite the current political aversion to electrification. Then any (Reading-)Oxford-Bletchley services can work entirely on AC. Milton Keynes to Marylebone would still obviously have to be diesel.

 

[Andyjs247]

Well, GWR to Oxford will hopefully be happening eventually (it only makes sense, after all), despite the current political aversion to electrification. Then any (Reading-)Oxford-Bletchley services can work entirely on AC. Milton Keynes to Marylebone would still obviously have to be diesel.

It had been confirmed previously that EWR would get bi-modes. Electrification for the moment at least seems to be off the table.

 

[richieb1971]

Do nr even build non compliant structures for ohle these days?

 

[MarkRedon]

Do nr even build non compliant structures for ohle these days?

On current plans, this railway will not be built by Network Rail but by a design, build and operate company. However, I doubt that final planning will be complete before another general election!

 

[snowball]

Do nr even build non compliant structures for ohle these days?

I think virtually all new structures over railways in the last 50+ years have been compliant with the electrification clearances that applied at the time.

 

[MK Tom]

Would I be correct in that NR in not offering overbridges in the Milton Keynes area, are hoping that Milton Keynes will have to fund them if they're considered necessary as a business case? e.g. that at Bow Brickhill Station, and at Woburn Sands.

No overbridges at either location in the consultation plans I've seen. But MKC aren't going to fund it either - just look at their reluctance to fund underpasses or dualling of roads around the Western and Eastern expansion areas.

 

[MK Tom]

Does anyone know what the plans are for the Calvert station site? The consultation plans I saw for some reason had no detail on them around Claydon Junction and Calvert. It was just the base map with no proposals drawn on it.

I'm keen to see the platform retained as it's one of the few GCR island platforms left on the national network.

I'm also quite troubled by the proposed barrier at Quainton, but that was always going to be an issue.

Also I'll ask yet again, please rename this thread! It's not about a delay, it's about general E-WR discussion.

 

[swt_passenger]

Does anyone know what the plans are for the Calvert station site?

I'm keen to see the platform retained as it's one of the few GCR island platforms left on the national network.

Already to be removed completely by HS2, as well as the road bridge that would have given access to the platform.

The entire layout is changed in the area, with HS2 to the west of the Chiltern route and the waste transfer sidings relocated east of the Chiltern route.

Agree about the thread title, although it was appropriate for the first few weeks - the content has definitely become a general EWR construction discussion since...

 

[ainsworth74]

Also I'll ask yet again, please rename this thread! It's not about a delay, it's about general E-WR discussion.

Agree about the thread title, although it was appropriate for the first few weeks - the content has definitely become a general EWR construction discussion since...

Whilst we do try hard it is almost impossible for the volunteer Staff Team to read every single post on the forum (you lot make thousands of them every week!) so when you do have a request for us or need to draw our attention something please use the report function (

) as this sends a message to the whole team so usually one of us will then be in a position to do something about it.

In this case I've only become aware of the request because someone has reported that the thread needs renaming!

Many thanks,
ainsworth74

 

[MK Tom]

Already to be removed completely by HS2, as well as the road bridge that would have given access to the platform.

The entire layout is changed in the area, with HS2 to the west of the Chiltern route and the waste transfer sidings relocated east of the Chiltern route.

Hmm - is this why there are no plans for the Claydon Junction area in the consultation materials? Still pending detailed designs for the interaction with HS2?

It's a shame to see the platform go. What would be good would be some future proofing for a new station there, given the huge amount of new housing that's sprung up at Calvert recently.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hmm - is this why there are no plans for the Claydon Junction area in the consultation materials? Still pending detailed designs for the interaction with HS2?

That's my interpretation of what is described in the latest enhancement plan update:

GRIP 3 AIP completion
Single option selection and AIP completion for design work independent of HS2 interface December 2016 Completed

GRIP3 AIP completion
Full single option selection and AIP completion July 2017 Regulated Output

(My bolding) That reads as if the final decision is due now anyway...

 

[aylesbury]

New series of roadshows very shortly Winslow and further to MK so things moving forward .Wish that the line had been built years back when first surveys took place also it would have cost less but DAFT as usual sat back and hoped it would all go away.Interesting work carried out on bridge north of Winslow ,it was jacked up instead of being dismantled but seems like this method is not popular with NR for some reason.Passed over road bridge at Winslow and noted undergrowth is coming back on line so more work needed here before track laying.

 

[The Planner]

Hmm - is this why there are no plans for the Claydon Junction area in the consultation materials? Still pending detailed designs for the interaction with HS2?

It's a shame to see the platform go. What would be good would be some future proofing for a new station there, given the huge amount of new housing that's sprung up at Calvert recently.

Like I have said before in the thread, there is passive provision for a station at Steeple Claydon. There is no way you could put a station in at Calvert considering the line of HS2 and the depot.