Chiltern Oxford Link completed

[Eagle]

It still remains to be seen what's going to happen to Quainton Road.

 

[swt_passenger]

It still remains to be seen what's going to happen to Quainton Road.

Well it won't re-open for EWR either, and it's missed by HS2. But were you thinking of something else?

 

[Trog]

Might be a cheap win for the Aylesbury - MK service as the buildings and platform are all still intact. Build a car park etc let the preserved railway use it at week-ends chance of wins all round.

 

[jimm]

THis thread is supposed to be about Chiltern's Oxford-Bicester-London scheme. Can we keep it that way?

There is an East West thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=73224 which seems a more logical place to talk about Calvert, Quainton, Winslow, etc

 

[L+Y]

Calvert is east of Bicester, so near the East West route, nothing to do with this Chiltern project.

Nothing to do with the Chiltern plans, as jimm has pointed out already.

Hmm, I see.

The reason I asked was because I had thought that the Chiltern Oxford plans involved running trains up the old London Extension beyond Aylesbury as far as Calvert, and then constructing a new chord to link onto the EWR line, before running through Bicester to Oxford.

As someone who's not terribly familiar with the railway geography of the area, can someone correct me on this?

 

[Metrailway]

The new chord will be just south of Bicester connecting the Chiltern Main Line to the current Oxford - Bicester Line.

Here is a link on Google maps: https://maps.google.com/maps?ll=51.898449,-1.138165&q=loc:51.898449,-1.138165&hl=en&t=h&z=15

 

[jimm]

Hmm, I see.

The reason I asked was because I had thought that the Chiltern Oxford plans involved running trains up the old London Extension beyond Aylesbury as far as Calvert, and then constructing a new chord to link onto the EWR line, before running through Bicester to Oxford.

As someone who's not terribly familiar with the railway geography of the area, can someone correct me on this?

As Metrailway says, the chord line is being built in Bicester, it will be on a new embankment rising from just east of Bicester Town station up to a new junction on the Chiltern main line (ie the route to Banbury via High Wycombe) to the south of Bicester North station (if that makes sense...). See the pictures on the previous page.

If you went via Aylesbury, the journey time to London would be horrendous and not competitive with the GW Oxford-London route and the scheme wouldn't be viable. In any case, much of the land that even a tight south to west chord at Calvert would need is in a nature reserve.

In the past the railways themselves never rated the idea of Oxford-Bicester-Aylesbury or Aylesbury-Bletchley services (a change at Verney Junction being the option that was available) and the Great Central was built without any connection to the East West route. The south to east chord from Calvert to Claydon LNE junction was a 1940 emergency wartime connection and never had a regular passenger service, so Aylesbury-Milton Keynes will be something new as well.

 

[Metrailway]

In the past the railways themselves never rated the idea of Oxford-Aylesbury or Aylesbury-Bletchley services and the Great Central was built without any connection to the East West route. The south to east chord from Calvert to Claydon LNE junction was a 1940 emergency wartime connection and never had a regular passenger service, so Aylesbury-MK will be something new.

I'll have to disagree with that. There were several railway proposals in the 1800s linking Oxford and Aylesbury, the most famous one being the Brill Tramway.

Although not regular, BR ran Aylesbury - MK services in the 1980s for Christmas Shoppers.

 

[jimm]

I'll have to disagree with that. There were several railway proposals in the 1800s linking Oxford and Aylesbury, the most famous one being the Brill Tramway.

Although not regular, BR ran Aylesbury - MK services in the 1980s for Christmas Shoppers.

But they never actually built a line, did they? Nor did the GC see fit to put in chords north of Calvert when the London extension was built.

 

[Eagle]

One of the original intentions of the Aylesbury and Buckingham railway (which later became the very end of the Metropolitan Railway) was to facilitate journeys between Aylesbury and Oxford. That's why Verney Junction had the layout it did. But the LNWR weren't having any of it and disallowed the ABR from running over their line or offering through ticketing.

 

[Metrailway]

But they never actually built a line, did they? Nor did the GC see fit to put in chords north of Calvert when the London extension was built.

The Brill Tramway couldn't extend the line to Oxford, as they couldn't raise enough capital to fund the expensive tunnelling required from Brill to reach Oxford. As Eagle has stated the A&BR intended for through services to run between Aylesbury and Oxford on their line to Verney Junction but railway politics got in the way.

The GCR had little interest in short haul traffic on the London Extension railway when the line was planned and built. The point of the London Extension was to provide direct high speed link from the GCR's large network in the Midlands/North to London, reducing it's reliance on other railway companies to transport it's traffic to London (and the Channel ports).

The London Extension line from Annesley Junction to Quainton Road, crossed several railways over its 90+ mile length, yet there was only one junction to other railway companies, which was at Woodford & Hinton, which connected the GWR (via the GCR branch to Banbury) and the SMJR. Later on, there was also another junction on the Extension line at Grendon Underwood, for the GW/GC line to High Wycombe and London.

 

[edwin_m]

The London Extension line from Annesley Junction to Quainton Road, crossed several railways over its 90+ mile length, yet there was only one junction to other railway companies, which was at Woodford & Hinton, which connected the GWR (via the GCR branch to Banbury) and the SMJR. Later on, there was also another junction on the Extension line at Grendon Underwood, for the GW/GC line to High Wycombe and London.

There were several junctions with the Great Northern between Annesley and Nottingham Weekday Cross, and indeed Nottingham Victoria was a joint station.

 

[Andyjs247]

If you went via Aylesbury, the journey time to London would be horrendous and not competitive with the GW Oxford-London route and the scheme wouldn't be viable. In any case, much of the land that even a tight south to west chord at Calvert would need is in a nature reserve.

In the past the railways themselves never rated the idea of Oxford-Bicester-Aylesbury or Aylesbury-Bletchley services (a change at Verney Junction being the option that was available) and the Great Central was built without any connection to the East West route. The south to east chord from Calvert to Claydon LNE junction was a 1940 emergency wartime connection and never had a regular passenger service, so Aylesbury-Milton Keynes will be something new as well.

It is perhaps fortuitous that the chord from Claydon to Calvert was put in at all. Back in 1940, Milton Keynes was but a village. Bicester was also insignificant and the area around Verney Junction is still very rural. It's only in the post-War years that there has been significant growth around Milton Keynes (designated a new town in 1967) and since 1990 around Bicester following opening of the M40 Birmingham extension.

There never was much of significance between Rugby and Quainton - things may have been quite different if the Great Central had been built earlier or indeed in the 1830s if the London and Birmingham railway had been built through Buckingham instead of further to the east through Wolverton.

In the very early days I believe the LNW attempted to run an Oxford - Euston service via Bletchley but it was quite a lengthy route and not successful.

The Brill Tramway couldn't extend the line to Oxford, as they couldn't raise enough capital to fund the expensive tunnelling required from Brill to reach Oxford. As Eagle has stated the A&BR intended for through services to run between Aylesbury and Oxford on their line to Verney Junction but railway politics got in the way.

The GCR had little interest in short haul traffic on the London Extension railway when the line was planned and built. The point of the London Extension was to provide direct high speed link from the GCR's large network in the Midlands/North to London, reducing it's reliance on other railway companies to transport it's traffic to London (and the Channel ports).

The London Extension line from Annesley Junction to Quainton Road, crossed several railways over its 90+ mile length, yet there was only one junction to other railway companies, which was at Woodford & Hinton, which connected the GWR (via the GCR branch to Banbury) and the SMJR. Later on, there was also another junction on the Extension line at Grendon Underwood, for the GW/GC line to High Wycombe and London.

As mentioned there was little traffic to be generated in the section south of Rugby. The established rival railway companies didn't make it easy for the GC to make the connections either.

The GW/GC joint line was built in part because by that time the Great Central had fallen out with the Metropolitan and needed an alternative route to access London. The Great Western also needed a quicker route to Birmingham. The section from Grendon Underwood to Ashendon Junction and Princes Risborough and east from High Wycombe to London opened in 1906. The cut off line through Bicester to Aynho Junction didn't open until 1910. Before 1906 trains from High Wycombe to Paddington had to go via Maidenhead.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

In the very early days I believe the LNW attempted to run an Oxford - Euston service via Bletchley but it was quite a lengthy route and not successful.

And the OW&W ran trains from Wolverhampton and Worcester to Euston via Yarnton and Bletchley for several years in the 1850s before it fell under GWR control.

 

[RobLawrence]

[my first RF post: hello!]
Those following developments may be interested to hear that this morning a (first) train load of spoil appeared to run from the site of the chord, through Bicester Town station and towards Oxford. I heard the locomotives arrive pre-0600 and the train departed between 0930 and 1000, involving a closure of the level crossing near Bicester Town station - much the surprise of many who use the road -- several of whom had never seen the barriers down previously!

The queues of traffic that built up on the adjacent roads in the 3 minute barrier closure were remarkable. Presumably this level crossing will remain operational once the Water Eaton to Marylebone service begins -- would that mean up to 4 closures per hour?

For those interested by such things, the locomotives were 66031 (Calvert end of the train) and 47727 (Oxford end of the train).

 

[NSEFAN]

[my first RF post: hello!]
Those following developments may be interested to hear that this morning a (first) train load of spoil appeared to run from the site of the chord, through Bicester Town station and towards Oxford. I heard the locomotives arrive pre-0600 and the train departed between 0930 and 1000, involving a closure of the level crossing near Bicester Town station - much the surprise of many who use the road -- several of whom had never seen the barriers down previously!

The queues of traffic that built up on the adjacent roads in the 3 minute barrier closure were remarkable. Presumably this level crossing will remain operational once the Water Eaton to Marylebone service begins -- would that mean up to 4 closures per hour?

For those interested by such things, the locomotives were 66031 (Calvert end of the train) and 47727 (Oxford end of the train).

Hi and welcome to the forum!

Hopefully the increased linespeed and better signalling will mean that those barriers won't be down for so long when passenger services start using the line.

 

[The Planner]

Barriers will be down for 20-25 mins an hour, possibly more, once E-W gets going I would suspect.

 

[route:oxford]

Barriers will be down for 20-25 mins an hour, possibly more, once E-W gets going I would suspect.

I'm sure that will be welcomed.

In other towns and cities local authorities have to spend £ms to get that level of road calming in urban areas.

 

[Trog]

And the OW&W ran trains from Wolverhampton and Worcester to Euston via Yarnton and Bletchley for several years in the 1850s before it fell under GWR control.

Hence the Worcester Curve south of Bletchley.

 

[paul1609]

I'm sure that will be welcomed.

In other towns and cities local authorities have to spend £ms to get that level of road calming in urban areas.

Its not so good when the barriers are down for so long it impacts on emergency vehicles response time as is the case in West Sussex.
Some of the West Coast way barriers are down for 5 trains at a time.

 

[route:oxford]

Its not so good when the barriers are down for so long it impacts on emergency vehicles response time as is the case in West Sussex.
Some of the West Coast way barriers are down for 5 trains at a time.

Not really going to make much of a difference in Bicester though is it? on average, how many times an hour does a "blue light" cross the level crossing at the moment?

Traffic calming in Oxford already adds 20 minutes to the Ambulance journey from the A40 to the John Radcliffe in the peaks...

 

[TheKnightWho]

Not really going to make much of a difference in Bicester though is it? on average, how many times an hour does a "blue light" cross the level crossing at the moment?

Traffic calming in Oxford already adds 20 minutes to the Ambulance journey from the A40 to the John Radcliffe in the peaks...

Quite frankly, I wish they'd pedestrianise the whole bloody centre; emergency vehicles excepted.

 

[67018]

Quite frankly, I wish they'd pedestrianise the whole bloody centre; emergency vehicles excepted.

Yes, It's not as if the level crossing is on a critical route anyway - through traffic goes round the ring road or straight down King's End to the A41. Although pedestrianisation would make road access to Bicester Town Station a bit difficult just at the time when more people will want to use it.

What will be more of a problem is when East West Rail opens, with the level crossing on the A4421 which is the main road round the town. Does anyone know how long the barriers are likely to be down there?

 

[joeykins82]

I would imagine NR will aim to close the crossing on a road that busy

 

[The Planner]

No, the crossing stays. It is the main route into the town from the eastern side.

 

[Eagle]

And there's no room for an overbridge or underpass.

 

[joeykins82]

It looks like there's enough room for an overbridge to my admittedly untrained eye, the Bicester Road just to the east crosses the line via an overbridge and is the same distance from the roundabout. I'm not a civil engineer though, and I'm also not sure how they'd get from the flat crossing to an overbridge without a prolonged closure.

 

[The Planner]

Google StreetView it, you won't get a bridge in there. The A41 is pretty much rising from the roundabout.

 

[Eagle]

It looks like there's enough room for an overbridge to my admittedly untrained eye, the Bicester Road just to the east crosses the line via an overbridge and is the same distance from the roundabout. I'm not a civil engineer though, and I'm also not sure how they'd get from the flat crossing to an overbridge without a prolonged closure.

Are you looking at the right place? Bicester Road isn't "just to the east", it's over a mile away outside the Bicester bypass.

We're talking about London Road (the B4100) just south of Bicester town centre.

 

[joeykins82]

Ah, I see the source of the confusion! I was replying to this:

What will be more of a problem is when East West Rail opens, with the level crossing on the A4421 which is the main road round the town. Does anyone know how long the barriers are likely to be down there?

Totally get that the crossing over the B4100 London Road isn't going anywhere.