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

[Bletchleyite]

Again it comes down to the competing demands of what people want EWR to be - is it supposed to be a express Cambridge to Oxford service, a ECML-GWML bypass of London or a local commuter service?

It's basically meant to be a rail version of the X5 - a regional express service for intermediate journeys many of which will involve the ever-growing Milton Keynes. There is next to no demand for actual end to end journeys.

 

[Verulamius]

The EastWest Rail company has published the consultation documents.

https://eastwestrail.co.uk/haveyoursay

There are 5 route options which are based on the three main decisions:

New Station South of Bedford, or route through existing Bedford Midland Station.

Route south of Sandy, or between Sandy and St Neots in the Tempsford area.

Route via Bassingbourn or Cambourne.

 

[TheDavibob]

Ooh, fun times.

First note: via Cambourne *still* approaches Cambridge from the south.

EDIT: To add, they discuss a northern approach. Essentially, they are "open" to it being discussed, but of the two routes on offer:

a) to Histon and thence the busway route: would remove the busway and thus bugger up northwestern connectivity for Cambridge itself. They're very much not keen.
b) across the top of Cambridge and thence connecting Miltonish area: a painful detour and probably difficult build, and not as useful for connectivity since the busway already does that.

Both alongside the reversing problems discussed.

 

[swt_passenger]

TWAO enquiry starts in Milton Keynes on the 6th February - Bicester - Bletchley - Bedford & Milton Keynes, Aylesbury- Bletchley - Milton Keynes...

I think you’ve answered a question that wasn’t being asked. Wasn’t Jorge asking about the route consultation, rather than the TWAO Inquiry? However, overtaken by events because the consultation is now publicised anyway.

 

[camflyer]

The XC service from Birmingham to Stansted is so slow I'm amazed anyone takes it.

With big expansion plans at Stansted it really does deserve more rail services though I understand that there are significant engineering challenges (especially with the single track tunnel) to make it happen.

 

[mr_jrt]

I can appreciate them trying to limit scope, but really we should be looking to serve both Ipswich/Norwich AND Stansted (even if that means a separate project will be required to fully utilise things aka. a second tunnel and perhaps extenstion to Braintree), and that means one service is going to need to reverse somewhere. The southern bays at Cambridge are (or at least, used to be when I last went that way!) pretty heavily used already, so capacity may be an issue there, whilst the northern bays are lightly used, though have been shortsightedly shortened for the new footbridge. If you had to reverse at Cambridge, then I'd argue sorting out the northern bays made more sense. That said, coming from the south you can now reverse at Cambridge North, so perhaps that's an option, be it from freeing up the bays at Cambridge itself, or heading north to using them there.

I don't buy the northern busway argument - there are plenty of alternative road options to maintain connectivity (which may, arguably, actually improve connectivity), which you choose is obviously dependant on where the rail alignment reaches the route. My money would be to divert the busway down through Orchard Park from Histon. It can run along Kings Hedges Road to Milton Road and then continue on its current routing, leaving the current alignment free for EWR to reach Cambridge North. It's going to increase costs, but getting four tracks down from there to Cambridge would be worthwhile in the long-term. That said, until Cambridge North opened this section of track was much quieter than the section south of Cambridge, so surely paths could be found for EWR to reach Cambridge station on the existing tracks?

 

[si404]

Again it comes down to the competing demands of what people want EWR to be - is it supposed to be a express Cambridge to Oxford service, a ECML-GWML bypass of London or a local commuter service?

This point is important to corridor decisions near Cambridge, but not that relevant to whether Stansted as an eastern terminus of E-W Rail services should be a tail wagging the dog on those decisions.

It's pretty moot though, given the options we've been given.

 

[camflyer]

Ooh, fun times.

First note: via Cambourne *still* approaches Cambridge from the south.

EDIT: To add, they discuss a northern approach. Essentially, they are "open" to it being discussed, but of the two routes on offer:

a) to Histon and thence the busway route: would remove the busway and thus bugger up northwestern connectivity for Cambridge itself. They're very much not keen.
b) across the top of Cambridge and thence connecting Miltonish area: a painful detour and probably difficult build, and not as useful for connectivity since the busway already does that.

Both alongside the reversing problems discussed.

Hmm - interesting. I've just skim read the document but will read it properly later. While keeping the door open for a northern approach it doesn't look like they are very keen on it at all. I sort of understand the argument against using the busway alignment as that would need huge engineering works to separate the line from traffic around the Milton Road and I understand that a loop through Milton itself would be quite a detour (but several of the southern options also have quite non linear routings) but I just hope that it gets proper (and fair) consideration. One argument given against a northern approach is that it would "not directly serve the proposed new Cambridge South station". That may be true but you could also say that the southern routes wouldn't directly serve Cambridge North.

 

[si404]

I think, given the mentions of it, they'd prefer those northern suburbs be served via the 'Cambridge Metro'. They even count the potential interchange between the city-based 'metro' and the more regional railway as a negative for Cambourne options.

One argument given against a northern approach is that it would "not directly serve the proposed new Cambridge South station". That may be true but you could also say that the southern routes wouldn't directly serve Cambridge North.

True, to some extent, but southern routes will be able to get to somewhere beyond Cambridge via Cambridge North - Norwich would go that way, Ipswich wouldn't. Northern routes can only head further east via reversing at Cambridge or via new-build track - it doesn't really serve Cambridge South unless terminating there, heading back west, or going to Stansted.

What is interesting is a lack of discussion about ECML track connections, though I guess that is for later. Cambridge to St Neots, Huntingdon (and Peterborough if track capacity allows?) would be a decent local service to have on E-W Rail - with the bonus of allowing services via Bedford to not all call at Cambourne/Bassingbourne, keeping those headline times down.

 

[camflyer]

Assumes, of course, that the "Cambridge Metro" ever sees the light of day and isn't another glorified bus (or "autonomous rubber-wheeled bus-like vehicle") service

 

[si404]

Indeed - but it highlights the DfT's priorities for E-W Rail aren't Cambridge commuter belt.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I think you’ve answered a question that wasn’t being asked. Wasn’t Jorge asking about the route consultation, rather than the TWAO Inquiry? However, overtaken by events because the consultation is now publicised anyway.

Correct I was. But its been answered

 

[TheDavibob]

Assumes, of course, that the "Cambridge Metro" ever sees the light of day and isn't another glorified bus (or "autonomous rubber-wheeled bus-like vehicle") service

Whilst Palmer's metro is pie in the sky, I would be surprised if some form of Cambourne - Cambridge busway isn't made reasonably soon, with route planning pretty advanced.

 

[Neen Sollars]

If going into Cambridge North from the north, to eliminate the reversing problem build a chord to access the Bury St Edmunds line directly by hanging a left.

 

[bspahh]

If going into Cambridge North from the north, to eliminate the reversing problem build a chord to access the Bury St Edmunds line directly by hanging a left.

You would also miss out on Cambridge station.

I think it is extremely unlikely that the route will come into Cambridge from the North. Certainly not along the guided busway line across Milton Road. If there was going to be a railway crossing over the A14/M11, then it should have been sorted out before the current building works.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I would do both if money was no object as well. Another advantage of a northern route is a potential service to Stansted?

Has the "money no object" scenario mentioned above any connection to financial matters currently prevailing in the area of question?

 

[camflyer]

You would also miss out on Cambridge station.

I think it is extremely unlikely that the route will come into Cambridge from the North. Certainly not along the guided busway line across Milton Road. If there was going to be a railway crossing over the A14/M11, then it should have been sorted out before the current building

The CambedRailRoad proposal does have a curve from the Cambridge-Ely line onto the Newmarket to Ipswich line. As a commuter from Newmarket to the Science Park that would be perfect for me but I just don't see how it could be feasible. Not only would you miss out Cambridge [Central] but I can't see where the curve would go unless you dig up Coldham's Common or go across the airport.

So, reluctantly, while the northern approach does have some attractions I think I'm going to accept that it has to come from the south - though I have no strong feelings over which corridor is selected. Not going va Cambourne would increase the need and urgency for a "Metro" link there and to other commuter towns.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Which route of the 5 does everyone prefer? For me route Route C

 

[camflyer]

Which route of the 5 does everyone prefer? For me route Route C

Still digging my way through the 60 pages of the full Technical Report...

 

[Tobbes]

I prefer B, but would lobby for the northerly approach taking over the busway, calling at a triangular Cambridge North and running though to Cambridge South, reversing if necessary there for Ipswich/Norwich - it seems to me much more likely that Ipswich/Norwich passengers (today, I would be one) will change onto EWR at Cambridge (Central).

 

[Neen Sollars]

I prefer B, but would lobby for the northerly approach taking over the busway, calling at a triangular Cambridge North and running though to Cambridge South, reversing if necessary there for Ipswich/Norwich - it seems to me much more likely that Ipswich/Norwich passengers (today, I would be one) will change onto EWR at Cambridge (Central).

Yes its route B for me and heading north after Cambourne taking over the busway. Train terminates at Cambridge North. Change here for Newmarket, Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich via new chord to connect with existing junction. Either express bus to Cambridge City Centre or Rail Shuttle Service. Lots of room at Cambridge North for additional platforms. Also change here for Norwich.
Oxford - Cambridge line, or the "Oxford-Cambridge Knowledge Corridor" Departs: Cambridge North, Calling at, Cambridge Science Park, Cambourne, (New) Sandy, Bedford, Bletchley, Winslow, Bicester, Oxford Parkway, Oxford, and wait for it, Oxford Science Park terminating at Oxford Business Park.
Oxford and Cambridge centres of world beating expertise in tech, science, medical science and biotech, this route worth billions of £££££sssss to the post Brexit UK economy. And I think for once the politicians actually get it!

 

[Tobbes]

If there's that much priority for the busway, and it couldn't be diverted, the railway could go into a cut and cover tunnel, with the busway on top, of course.

 

[camflyer]

I see the attraction but "taking over the busway" would be a huge engineering project which would be way beyond my knowledge to estimate the feasibility of. The busway gets blocked by cars virtually every week and it crosses some major roads. Maybe if EWR had happened before the busway then a way might have been found but I don't see how ripping up the concrete will be easy.

 

[Tobbes]

I see the attraction but "taking over the busway" would be a huge engineering project which would be way beyond my knowledge to estimate the feasibility of. The busway gets blocked by cars virtually every week and it crosses some major roads. Maybe if EWR had happened before the busway then a way might have been found but I don't see how ripping up the concrete will be easy.

It is unlikely be completely straightforward, @camflyer, but this is a strategic project for the next 50-100 years, and we should so our best to get it right. If the busway is so valuable (and for the sake of argument I'm prepared to accept that it is), then putting the railway in a dual-track trench with the busway on top serves both modes without havinf sacrifice either. Of course, once the track is back, then St Ives, Huntingdon, Chatteris, Warboys and the rest become much stronger housing-driven rail reinstatement candidates - all to the good.

 

[didcotdean]

Yes its route B for me ... Oxford, and wait for it, Oxford Science Park terminating at Oxford Business Park.

East West Consortium Strategic Board itself seems to favour Didcot over Cowley for the final destination. Maybe they want a stop at Culham as well enroute ...

 

[gingerheid]

Also prefer Cambourne and Busway (the Histon stretch of Busway is very replaceable - cross the A14 with some bus priority works, and to access the Science Park use the Orchard Park busway the other direction).

I can see why it's not going to happen, though

 

[PeterC]

Again it comes down to the competing demands of what people want EWR to be - is it supposed to be a express Cambridge to Oxford service, a ECML-GWML bypass of London or a local commuter service?

It originally appeared in the press purely as a Camridge to Oxford link which made as much sense as building HS2 just to knock 10 minutes off the time to Birmingham.

 

[mr_jrt]

Option E for me. Serving Bedford Town centre is too valuable an opportunity to miss, and St Neots South to Cambourne has always been my preferred corridor. I prefer a northern approach as it makes reaching Stansted simpler (and beyond, given follow-on projects), but I can appreciate the attractiveness of the southern approach as it gets you four tracks into the main station much easier. I do worry about congestion on the line through Shepreth acting as a bottleneck though, both as general capacity and the new most-likely-flat junction. The vagaries of making a more southern junction to the WAML in Shelford also concerns me, as that corridor really doesn't look like it can handle much more at all.

As for the northern approach - removing the physical elements of the busway between Histon and Cambridge North should be (relatively) trivial - I watched them installing it on the southern section from the train every day and I'm reasonably sure you could remove the concrete sections as easily as they were originally (badly!) laid. I think they had to do this in places already due to the aforementioned poor installation. Once those are out it's little different to building any other new rail route I would have thought. Only real obstacle would be the Milton Road level crossing as there's not a lot of distance to get from either above or below road level to grade by the time you reach Cambridge North, and I can't see a road underpass being viable either.

 

[Tobbes]

Option E for me. Serving Bedford Town centre is too valuable an opportunity to miss, and St Neots South to Cambourne has always been my preferred corridor. I prefer a northern approach as it makes reaching Stansted simpler (and beyond, given follow-on projects), but I can appreciate the attractiveness of the southern approach as it gets you four tracks into the main station much easier. I do worry about congestion on the line through Shepreth acting as a bottleneck though, both as general capacity and the new most-likely-flat junction. The vagaries of making a more southern junction to the WAML in Shelford also concerns me, as that corridor really doesn't look like it can handle much more at all.

As for the northern approach - removing the physical elements of the busway between Histon and Cambridge North should be (relatively) trivial - I watched them installing it on the southern section from the train every day and I'm reasonably sure you could remove the concrete sections as easily as they were originally (badly!) laid. I think they had to do this in places already due to the aforementioned poor installation. Once those are out it's little different to building any other new rail route I would have thought. Only real obstacle would be the Milton Road level crossing as there's not a lot of distance to get from either above or below road level to grade by the time you reach Cambridge North, and I can't see a road underpass being viable either.

Putting the line into a cut and cover tunnel from Cambridge North does deal with the Milton Road LC issue, of course.

 

[MadCommuter]

Bedford Midland has to be served, it is a major town on the route and it needs to be the interchange with East Midlands services. If they use a Bedford South, will East Midlands call there and Bedford. I suspect Midland will suffer a loss of frequency. How does Wixams fit in to this? Could that be combined with a Bedford South?