That's assuming reversing at Bletchley
Referring to passenger traffic. Not really correct, a lot of places would become direct or 1 change, e.g. Coventry, Northampton, Bedford, Leamington etc. I travel to Leamington reguarly, using A14 as theres no rail option.
Not if it impairs the delivery of the main EWR objective. I doubt that there would be enough new revenue from Ipswich to defray the increased delay repay costs for passengers between Cambridge and Oxford.
Even if there is this huge latent demand for train travel between Ipswich and Birmingham, the benefit of going via EWR from Ipswich is not the same as from Cambridge. It is already possible to do Ipswich-Birmingham in 3h38m via Ely, with 1 change, and without going to Cambridge. From Ipswich there is no time saving from going via Cambridge and Bletchley, compared with going via Ely and Peterborough.
There is no "wider EWR zone", only the Oxford-Cambridge corridor.
When EWR opens, you will be able to do that from Cambridge with one change. At Oxford.
Even if not officially, there is in practice as it's the missing piece of the puzzle for a lot of journeys.
40% of us don’t have cars. If there is no rail route I don’t drive - I tend not to travel.
Its not about Ipswich specifically, but by joining the Ipswich-Cambridge to EWR you will pick up the demand from a lot of East Anglia. Arguably it could be extended to Colchester (inc Manningtree), which has a v pro-rail population.
Not an expert on this, but there will already be Oxford-MKC services from Bletchley, so any further enhancement is going to be a fifth (maybe sixth) track as far as MKC, and perhaps more platform capacity too. Of course it can all be done but I can't see it even being thought about until
I somewhat disagree - there's now the Quango "England's Economic Heartland" that is centred around EWR but does include a number of places close to, but not on EWR.
I know that the A14 and the A428/421 carry lots of traffic, but you have 3 massive misconceptions.
For rail journeys from Colchester, East West Rail is never doing to be a realistic alternative to travelling via London.
England's Economic Heartland is a lobby group of local councils. It is the same as the old arc apart from the addition of Swindon.
Wishlists is what lobby groups like EEH do. As you say, it is all very speculative. Some of this wishlist may turn into reality, but that will probably take another 25 years.
This wasn't agreed with on the other forum, but there's no evidence either way.
It's no different to any other cross country service. E.g. Reading to Birmingham has an excellent road option, much better than the A14, yet still significant amounts of people choose to go by train. Cambridge & Bedford to Birmingham would be the same with a fast direct service.
That's true, but the 2 are not mutually exclusive. The Oxford-Cambridge service can be delivered, as well as connecting cities further away.
The difference is that Reading to Birmingham are already joined by a railway.
Cambridge & Birmingham will also be joined by rail with EWR. The services will reverse at Bletchley.
This was discussed in the previous thread, it's basically the Cambridge to Peterborough service that then goes round to Birmingham via Leicester. No competition to driving there.
Reading-Birmingham is different to Cambridge-Birmingham in important respects.
Absolutely. It is all just fantasy until the eastern leg of EWR is built.
Those locals will be replaced by electric trains to Oxford. Oxford is more suitable for terminating trains than Didcot.
XC crosses several mainlines with considerable padding, and still has many delays. EWR could be more tightly run if it didn't go onto other trains territory. While extending the train would benefit some people (eg Tempsford to Newmarket could be on a single train), it would be slower than the individual legs, it would slow down the Oxford to Cambridge part.
Including Northampton and Bristol is news to me. In theory I like it, every train from Paddington through Didcot to Oxford is a path from Oxford through Swindon.
To run the numbers we need to look at the overall service to see if its viable, which is to Coventry, Birmingham Int and Birmingham NS (excluding Rugby as can't compare to Oxford).
| Oxford | Birmingham NS | 57,873 |
| Oxford | Birmingham Int | 19,104 |
| Oxford | Coventry | 30,464 |
| Reading | Birmingham NS | 35,738 |
| Reading | Birmingham Int | 5,411 |
| Reading | Coventry | 11,745 |
160,335 |
That's not correct. As pointed out above, Reading is nearer to Birmingham than Cambridge. Also Oxford (67 miles via Solihull or 72 miles via Coventry) is nearer than Bedford (83 miles).
I am not sure there is that much between any two universities. It's more about accessibility to/from any point X to University Y or Z, whether for employment or study. 'Comunication' in a 'university' sense is already and will be increasingly by I.T. I recognise the value of face-to-face, but it is not 'the future'.
Without doing rigorous research, my gut tells me that areas in which Oford excels are not so at Cambridge, and v-v. Competition is with Harvard or Yale, etc. Maybe a student, or spouse, may travel for weekend 'face to face'!
We (Manchester) have a cooperation with Cambridge, which theoretically involves more travel and visits (discussions in person remain better than Zoom), though I only tend to do things with Oxford, which is easier.I am not sure there is that much between any two universities. It's more about accessibility to/from any point X to University Y or Z, whether for employment or study. 'Comunication' in a 'university' sense is already and will be increasingly by I.T. I recognise the value of face-to-face, but it is not 'the future'.
The long-proposed flight connections betwen Oxford and Cambridge did not 'take off'
People judge their proximity to places by the crow or by the road length, not by the length of the railway line (which is only 1 of the factors in rail travel time). By road, Cambridge is nearer to B'ham than Reading. I think 'as the crow flies' is fairest which gives Reading & Oxford as 81 & 57 miles respectively from B'ham. Compared with 87 & 65 for Cambridge & Bedford. That is a very similar pair.
Indeed. That's a 67% proportion, I used 70% based on the comparable station exits/entries but if we use 67% the numbers suggest 107,000 journeys from the pair to the 3 stations. Plus the MK & Rugby traffic that the Reading/Oxford service doesn't serve.
Those numbers don't tell us anything. It's a slow service and requires a change, that's not going to compete with a direct motorway. However a fast direct rail service can compete with a direct motorway, as with Oxford and the M40.
There is no 'need' for EWR trains to reach Didcot, let alone Swindon. Those paths should be taken by trains London- Oxford, once the latter's shambles has been 'solved', and London-Bristol, the West and Wales.
"As the crow flies" is fine for crows.
Then you might as well order a batch of battery units to cover a joined diagram and recharge them at Didcot and between Bletchley and Milton Keynes.
That's why I also quoted the pre-pandemic numbers. EWR did the same in the non-statutory consultation.
However it is measured, Reading is nearer than Cambridge and Oxford is nearer than Bedford. 65 and 57 are not similar, one is 14% further than the other.
They are enough to say that a direct journey won't send the numbers leaping from 8k to 70k.
What matters is that employees and businesses around Oxford and Cambridge have access to both universities.
This especially apples to couples, EWR will mean that they don't both have to work in one or the other, and don't have to live in either.
You'll need some more signals and crossovers then.
