Chiltern - beyond Oxford?

[Flinn Reed]

With the Chiltern route via High Wycombe offering a similar journey time between London and Oxford to GWR's Paddington service, has it ever been considered to extend Chiltern services beyond Oxford, to reverse at Oxford the extending along the Cotswold line to Worcester or Hereford?

 

[HST43257]

With the Chiltern route via High Wycombe offering a similar journey time between London and Oxford to GWR's Paddington service, has it ever been considered to extend Chiltern services beyond Oxford, to reverse at Oxford the extending along the Cotswold line to Worcester or Hereford?

Given the need to reverse at Oxford, I doubt it would provide any speed benefits, with GWR being a few minutes faster anyway. With a Chiltern train reversing at oxford, It would have to use the bay platforms then cross all the way to the far line (northbound towards charlbury and Banbury). This would mean approximately a journey that is 15 minutes longer and a train that makes many conflicting movements where, at many times, you can’t afford to loss paths into and out of the station.

 

[PeterC]

The usual suggestion is to reopen the Cowley branch to passengers and run through to a new station there.

I thought that there had been some serious talk about reopening.

 

[Flinn Reed]

The usual suggestion is to reopen the Cowley branch to passengers and run through to a new station there.

I thought that there had been some serious talk about reopening.

I think the Cowley branch may have been a missed opportunity in providing a new Oxford-Marylebone service. This could have left the main line at Princes Risborough, with possible new stations at Thame, Wheatley and Cowley. The directness of this route would probably make it much faster than either of the existing London-Oxford routes (via Bicester Village or via Reading). Plus approaching Oxford from the south would allow possible extensions towards the Cotswolds.

Other than being cheaper to construct, the only advantage of the current Chiltern route is the direct London connections to Bicester Village and Oxford Parkway.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Other than being cheaper to construct, the only advantage of the current Chiltern route is the direct London connections to Bicester Village and Oxford Parkway.

The other advantage of it was getting a key part of East West Rail rebuilt to the required standard ready for the rest of it.

 

[The Planner]

I think the Cowley branch may have been a missed opportunity in providing a new Oxford-Marylebone service. This could have left the main line at Princes Risborough, with possible new stations at Thame, Wheatley and Cowley. The directness of this route would probably make it much faster than either of the existing London-Oxford routes (via Bicester Village or via Reading). Plus approaching Oxford from the south would allow possible extensions towards the Cotswolds.

Other than being cheaper to construct, the only advantage of the current Chiltern route is the direct London connections to Bicester Village and Oxford Parkway.

Old chestnut, Chiltern looked at it and it was easier to go via Bicester. Too much in the way of the old Risborough to Cowley section and too much money to be made from Bicester Village.

 

[swt_passenger]

I think the Cowley branch may have been a missed opportunity in providing a new Oxford-Marylebone service. This could have left the main line at Princes Risborough, with possible new stations at Thame, Wheatley and Cowley. The directness of this route would probably make it much faster than either of the existing London-Oxford routes (via Bicester Village or via Reading). Plus approaching Oxford from the south would allow possible extensions towards the Cotswolds.

Other than being cheaper to construct, the only advantage of the current Chiltern route is the direct London connections to Bicester Village and Oxford Parkway.

There was a fairly detailed explanation of exactly why they didn’t do this in one of the evidence papers for the Evergreen 3 TWA enquiry. It was definitely considered and ruled out because it wasn’t actually cheaper or easier.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

There was a fairly detailed explanation of exactly why they didn’t do this in one of the evidence papers for the Evergreen 3 TWA enquiry. It was definitely considered and ruled out because it wasn’t actually cheaper or easier.

As well as the outskirts of Thame, there's also the Motorway Services at Junction 8/8a of the M40 in the way.

 

[JamesT]

As well as the outskirts of Thame, there's also the Motorway Services at Junction 8/8a of the M40 in the way.

Looking at satellite photos of the area, fairly sure housing in Horspath, Littleworth, and Wheatley has been built on the former trackbed.

 

[PeterC]

Looking at satellite photos of the area, fairly sure housing in Horspath, Littleworth, and Wheatley has been built on the former trackbed.

As far as I can make out the line skirts the Oxford MSA but as well as the housing mentioned above there is a small development at Tiddington as well.

 

[billio]

Services could avoid Oxford and provide faster trains from Worcester to Marylebone by rebuilding the former Yarnton loop from Yarnton to Oxford Parkway. If journey times are about even using the two routes from Oxford to London, this new route would probably save 20 - 30 minutes on London - Worcester times.

It only needs a couple of miles track and rebuilding of the A34/A44 interchange. Pure speculation.

 

[The Planner]

Services could avoid Oxford and provide faster trains from Worcester to Marylebone by rebuilding the former Yarnton loop from Yarnton to Oxford Parkway. If journey times are about even using the two routes from Oxford to London, this new route would probably save 20 - 30 minutes on London - Worcester times.

It only needs a couple of miles track and rebuilding of the A34/A44 interchange. Pure speculation.

If the journey times are even from Oxford to London, where do the 20-30 minutes come from? Why would anyone change at Oxford to get to Marylebone when you would just use the tube from Paddington?

 

[JonathanH]

Services could avoid Oxford and provide faster trains from Worcester to Marylebone by rebuilding the former Yarnton loop from Yarnton to Oxford Parkway. If journey times are about even using the two routes from Oxford to London, this new route would probably save 20 - 30 minutes on London - Worcester times.

It only needs a couple of miles track and rebuilding of the A34/A44 interchange. Pure speculation.

Why would you have devote a path on the Marylebone to Oxford route and a path on the Cotswold line that aren't used to run to Oxford? Avoiding Oxford doesn't make any sense given the limited capacity on those routes. How many trains each day would use this speculative Yarnton loop?

 

[billio]

If the journey times are even from Oxford to London, where do the 20-30 minutes come from? Why would anyone change at Oxford to get to Marylebone when you would just use the tube from Paddington?

The saving in time is made by not going into Oxford - say 10 minutes to get to Oxford and say 10 minutes saved by starting from Oxford Parkway. Passengers on the Cotswold line travelling to London might like arriving there 20 minutes earlier than usual.

I am not suggesting this with any seriousness, but just imagining if this link had not been closed in the mid-sixties.
( Wikipedia article on Yarnton Loop. )

 

[The Planner]

The saving in time is made by not going into Oxford - say 10 minutes to get to Oxford and say 10 minutes saved by starting from Oxford Parkway. Passengers on the Cotswold line travelling to London might like arriving there 20 minutes earlier than usual.

I am not suggesting this with any seriousness, but just imagining if this link had not been closed in the mid-sixties.
( Wikipedia article on Yarnton Loop. )

No chance, Wolvercote Jn to Oxford is only 4 minutes.