Chiltern Oxford Link completed

[The Planner]

Following swt_passenger's helpful reply, the only really new railway is of course the spur east of Bicester Town (ex-LNWR) up to the ex-GW line. Without that, the scheme would not have been possible, although, interestingly, the proposed East-West scheme and proposed freight route would have needed the ex-LNWR line to be redoubled anyway.

The original plans by Chiltern did not have the route completely redoubled.

 

[alexx]

Given it's scheduled to depart from the new platform at Oxford, they've got that to finish first!

I'm sure it'll be fine - just be grateful Oxfordshire County Council aren't responsible for the work otherwise it'd be at least another two years

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

This has been a rebuilding of an existing single track line, the stretch between Oxford and Oxford Parkway has intentionally taken longer than the rest. It isn't a new connection, just re-worked.

The previous service just ran through Islip and terminated at Bicester Village (formerly Bicester Town), with a fairly sparse service. Both stations have been totally modernised with additional platforms for double track, and of course it is now a through route to Marylebone as well. (The latter being possible because of the only completely new railway, a double track linking chord at Bicester.)

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---



I understand from another forum that it isn't just stabled for that period, it spends time doing all the various shunt moves north and south of Oxford that will be needed for the trains that will use the through platforms, such as the LHCS.

I expect random short moves in and out of the various sidings either side of the station would not be planned so don't appear on RTT.

Thank you for the replies. I suppose this new link would be partly used if the East - West Link from Oxford towards Bletchley, MKC & Beyond ever goes ahead, which I hope it does. I think some waste trains use or used part of that link to go to the site near Calvert as well as coming the other way via Aylesbury.

By the way, Steam Dreams are operating a lunch time and evening steam charter service that hopefully will traverse this line on 06 June 2017 hauled by Flying Scotsman. I just received their latest brochure and booked it, £ 79.00 std class which I think is a good rate. They did hope to operate this route in June this year, but it was not possible, so they went on the Surrey Hills route instead and they do mention that route would be used again next June if there were operational issues then. I expect other charter trains will also go over this route when it's opened. (HDL are doing a bit of the Bletchley end next month I think via a charity tour train operator)

 

[midlandred]

Photos from today at Wolvercote and Walton Well Road, Oxford

 

[route:oxford]

By the way, Steam Dreams are operating a lunch time and evening steam charter service that hopefully will traverse this line on 06 June 2017 hauled by Flying Scotsman. I just received their latest brochure and booked it, £ 79.00 std class which I think is a good rate.

Once the North Oxford NIMBYs find out about this there'll be an uproar.

Dirty, noisy old steam engines ruining their lives. I can just imagine sour faced locals pictured in The Oxford Paper pointing at smutty knickers on their washing lines and demanding compensation for a dirty gusset.

 

[HowardGWR]

Photos from today at Wolvercote and Walton Well Road, Oxford

Great photography, thanks. I am amazed that grass seeding has developed so quickly. Are they the people in the flats who are moaning?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

And previous to that, there was a sparse service, on double track, to Bletchley, with some trains reversing at Bletchley and continuing to Cambridge. And previous to that, there were (I think) occasional through trains to Euston via Bletchley. Indeed, Oxford is still one of the destinations offered on the gate houses (now boozers) at Euston.

The Oxford-Bletchley route to Euston was the principal route between Worcester and London from 1854 to 1861, when the GWR took over the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton line.

 

[jimm]

The Oxford-Bletchley route to Euston was the principal route between Worcester and London from 1854 to 1861, when the GWR took over the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton line.

For those not familiar with the area, the OWW trains did not go into Oxford, instead running direct to and from Bletchley using the Yarnton Loop - aka Buckinghamshire Junction Railway - which ran between Yarnton Junction on the Cotswold Line and Banbury Road Junction (at the far side of Banbury Road from Oxford Parkway station) on the Bicester/Bletchley line. This closed in 1965.

There was also a short-lived curve from this line that allowed OWW trains to run into Oxford Rewley Road station but it was mostly used by freight and had been lifted by the time of the 1922 Ordnance Survey map of the area.

Much of the formation of the loop line was obliterated when the A34, A4260 and Peartree interchange were built.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckinghamshire_Junction_Railway
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Great photography, thanks. I am amazed that grass seeding has developed so quickly. Are they the people in the flats who are moaning?

It hasn't grown that fast. The grading of the cuttings at Wolvercote was done several months ago.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=9825.510

The Waterside estate is north of Walton Well Road in Oxford, on the right-hand edge of this picture.

http://cliffjones.zenfolio.com/p323911479/haee48dc#haee48dc

 

[MikePJ]

Great photography, thanks. I am amazed that grass seeding has developed so quickly. Are they the people in the flats who are moaning?

I'm sure some of them are, but those flats are very new and were highly controversial when they were built, because they're visible from the much-loved Port Meadow. The anti-railway sentiment was and is mostly from people who live near Wolvercote roundabout, who complained variously in the local media and at public meetings about noise, extra traffic generated from Oxford Parkway being a danger to local schoolchildren ("won't somebody think of the children!") and roosting bats in Wolvercote tunnel (which, I may add, is under a major roundabout and thus not the tranquil rural idyll most people think of when they hear "bat roost"), but actually what was at the root cause of their objections was the belief that a more frequent train service would cause vibration damage to nearby homes. Nowhere was this more obvious than when Chiltern Railways and Natural England devised a solution to the bat roosting issue and the residents still objected! Notwithstanding considerable reassurance from everyone concerned that the noisy jointed rails would be replaced with the continuously-welded type, that modern trains were not as noisy as the half-remembered heavy freight trains of the 60s and 70s, and totally ignoring numerous studies, calculations and demonstrations that train vibrations were mostly going to be eliminated and didn't damage houses anyway...

North Oxford, sadly, has a significant minority of wealthy, well-connected, retired people who do their best to set the whole place in aspic. Very few places have such a high class of NIMBY - injunctions in the High Court are rarely a thing that has to be contended with when you build through a poor area!

 

[jimm]

I'm sure some of them are, but those flats are very new and were highly controversial when they were built, because they're visible from the much-loved Port Meadow. The anti-railway sentiment was and is mostly from people who live near Wolvercote roundabout, who complained variously in the local media and at public meetings about noise, extra traffic generated from Oxford Parkway being a danger to local schoolchildren ("won't somebody think of the children!") and roosting bats in Wolvercote tunnel (which, I may add, is under a major roundabout and thus not the tranquil rural idyll most people think of when they hear "bat roost"), but actually what was at the root cause of their objections was the belief that a more frequent train service would cause vibration damage to nearby homes. Nowhere was this more obvious than when Chiltern Railways and Natural England devised a solution to the bat roosting issue and the residents still objected! Notwithstanding considerable reassurance from everyone concerned that the noisy jointed rails would be replaced with the continuously-welded type, that modern trains were not as noisy as the half-remembered heavy freight trains of the 60s and 70s, and totally ignoring numerous studies, calculations and demonstrations that train vibrations were mostly going to be eliminated and didn't damage houses anyway...

North Oxford, sadly, has a significant minority of wealthy, well-connected, retired people who do their best to set the whole place in aspic. Very few places have such a high class of NIMBY - injunctions in the High Court are rarely a thing that has to be contended with when you build through a poor area!

You seem to be confusing the University of Oxford postgraduate accommodation blocks built on the old Oxford locomotive depot site that can be seen on the right-hand side of the pictures looking south from the Walton Well Road bridge - which are indeed visible from part of Port Meadow - with the Waterside Estate on the other side of the line, north of the bridge, where some residents have been making a fuss about the Chiltern project pretty much since the day it was announced.

 

[midlandred]

Oxford Mail report link
"New Oxford to London rail link almost ready after track work finishes"

 

[TheKnightWho]

You seem to be confusing the University of Oxford postgraduate accommodation blocks built on the old Oxford locomotive depot site that can be seen on the right-hand side of the pictures looking south from the Walton Well Road bridge - which are indeed visible from part of Port Meadow - with the Waterside Estate on the other side of the line, north of the bridge, where some residents have been making a fuss about the Chiltern project pretty much since the day it was announced.

The Port Meadow flats were so controversial that the university had to hold a vote on whether or not to spend millions on removing the top floor. Thankfully they voted against.

With the total housing crisis in Oxford at the moment, I can't think of anything more selfish than moaning about a slight change to your view.

 

[route:oxford]

You seem to be confusing the University of Oxford postgraduate accommodation blocks built on the old Oxford locomotive depot site that can be seen on the right-hand side of the pictures looking south from the Walton Well Road bridge - which are indeed visible from part of Port Meadow - with the Waterside Estate on the other side of the line, north of the bridge, where some residents have been making a fuss about the Chiltern project pretty much since the day it was announced.

There was also a lot of controversy over the Waterside development on the old Lucy's works. If you pop into the Bod and have a look through their newspaper archive around 1995, you'll find it.

It would have cost an absolute fortune to have cleared the site to current standards. Thankfully everything is safely under the foundations.

 

[70014IronDuke]

And previous to that, there was a sparse service, on double track, to Bletchley, with some trains reversing at Bletchley and continuing to Cambridge. ....

No, no need for reversal. Trains crossed the LNW main line on the level south of Bletchley and left for Bedford/Cambridge from the east side of Bletchley. I think it was platform 6 or 7 back in the day.

In practice, however, all this Oxford to Cambridge stuff is myth. For most of its life the Bletchley-Oxford and Cambridge-Bedford St Johns-Bletchley services were largely independent. IIRC, most Oxford trains terminated in the south facing bays at Bletchley, which they shared with services to Buckingham/Banbury till that closed.

I think only one through Cambridge-Oxford train per day in the 50s, although services were improved around 1962 or 63.

This is probably why the term "Varsity Line" was unheard of when the route was open.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The Oxford-Bletchley route to Euston was the principal route between Worcester and London from 1854 to 1861, when the GWR took over the Oxford, Worcester and Wolverhampton line.

I didn't know that. thanks. and to Jimm as well for the map links.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Track laying complete according to press release!

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/oxford-to-marylebone-track-now-complete

"Network Rail engineers have finished laying new sections of track to connect Oxford city centre with London Marylebone - ahead of Chiltern Railways running services on the new line from December.

The final track installations were completed around Peartree and Wolvercote in Oxford. Network Rail’s ‘orange army’ engineers have transformed the old 20-40 mph branch line into a 100 mph main line."....

Bit of modern PR gloss here. It may have become a 20-40 mph line since the 1980s when Oxford-Bicester reopened (anyone know?) but "the old" line was at least a 60 mph line speed - in fact it might have been 70 mph, I'm not sure, before it closed.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The original plans by Chiltern did not have the route completely redoubled.

Interesting. Are you saying that it was the need to accommodate future East-West rail trains that caused it to be rebuilt as a complete double-track line?

 

[TheKnightWho]

There was also a lot of controversy over the Waterside development on the old Lucy's works. If you pop into the Bod and have a look through their newspaper archive around 1995, you'll find it.

It would have cost an absolute fortune to have cleared the site to current standards. Thankfully everything is safely under the foundations.

Are local objections what are causing the delays for the (badly needed) Jericho Wharf project, too?

 

[ctyerkes]

NB The estate north of Walton Well Road is Waterways, not Waterside.

Sent from my SM-T520 using Tapatalk

 

[MikePJ]

You seem to be confusing the University of Oxford postgraduate accommodation blocks built on the old Oxford locomotive depot site that can be seen on the right-hand side of the pictures looking south from the Walton Well Road bridge - which are indeed visible from part of Port Meadow - with the Waterside Estate on the other side of the line, north of the bridge, where some residents have been making a fuss about the Chiltern project pretty much since the day it was announced.

Sorry, my mistake. It's been two and half years since I moved away from Oxford, and the university accommodation debate was in full swing during the time I was there.

 

[HowardGWR]

The Port Meadow flats were so controversial that the university had to hold a vote on whether or not to spend millions on removing the top floor. Thankfully they voted against.

With the total housing crisis in Oxford at the moment, I can't think of anything more selfish than moaning about a slight change to your view.

An individual loss of view from a property is not a planning matter so it would not get anywhere to moan about it. A general spoiling of view in an AONB or NP, would be a planning matter, so could be used in an Objection to an application in or adjacent to such areas..

 

[jimm]

Interesting. Are you saying that it was the need to accommodate future East-West rail trains that caused it to be rebuilt as a complete double-track line?

That's it in a nutshell. Some embankments were found to need extensive remedial work to take double track again, so Chiltern initially planned to leave the line single in a number of places to keep costs down.

There would still have been enough double track to allow a half-hourly service frequency, so it wasn't seen as a issue for a Chiltern-only passenger service, plus the odd freight.

But once the East West scheme was taken up by the Government, then it was decided to provide double track throughout from the start.

 

[HowardGWR]

I assume NR track access charges are a national blanket rate, (per kilometer) otherwise the issue of apportionment would be an issue here.

 

[route:oxford]

Are local objections what are causing the delays for the (badly needed) Jericho Wharf project, too?

Well, there have been various objections for over a decade...

Best thing they could do really would be to demolish St Baranbas Church - it's a real eyesore. Maybe keep the Bell Tower though - could probably do a "Grand Design" with it.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Well, there have been various objections for over a decade...

Best thing they could do really would be to demolish St Baranbas Church - it's a real eyesore. Maybe keep the Bell Tower though - could probably do a "Grand Design" with it.

Looks like the wharf has planning permission, so that's something at least. To be honest, I just want the new bridge over the canal - it's a pain at the moment if you're going up that way from the station or beyond.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Best thing they could do really would be to demolish St Baranbas Church - it's a real eyesore.

*boggle*
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Looks like the wharf has planning permission, so that's something at least. To be honest, I just want the new bridge over the canal - it's a pain at the moment if you're going up that way from the station or beyond.

The main thing that has been holding the wharf development up AIUI is indeed arguments about the positioning of the new bridge(s).

 

[swt_passenger]

Interesting. Are you saying that it was the need to accommodate future East-West rail trains that caused it to be rebuilt as a complete double-track line?

In addition to jimm's reply above, there's a document presented to the TWA Order enquiry that explains all the infrastructure decision making processes, many resulting from the condition of the civils structures.

The original plan was for a 3 phase approach, Phase 1 being Evergreen 3 requirements only, Phase 2A being disruptive infrastructure improvements for freight gauge clearance to W10/12, and Phase 2B track doubling later for EWR.

The DfT added Phase 2A to the original work package fairly quickly, as it would have required a further line closure, particularly for Wolvercot tunnel. The two tracking throughout came later.

TWA Proof of evidence text: http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.u...-6-A - Proof of Evidence - Stephen Barker.pdf

TWA Proof of evidence drawings: http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/uploads/04Oct2010/CRCL-P-6-B2 - Appendix 2 - Stephen Barker.pdf

I've posted these links before much earlier in the thread, but they are good sources for details of the original plans.

 

[RPM]

That's it in a nutshell. Some embankments were found to need extensive remedial work to take double track again, so Chiltern initially planned to leave the line single in a number of places to keep costs down.

There would still have been enough double track to allow a half-hourly service frequency, so it wasn't seen as a issue for a Chiltern-only passenger service, plus the odd freight.

But once the East West scheme was taken up by the Government, then it was decided to provide double track throughout from the start.

It's not going to be double track from the start. Oxford North Junction to a point just short of OXP will initially be single track.

 

[alexx]

It's not going to be double track from the start. Oxford North Junction to a point just short of OXP will initially be single track.

I thought that, but then I saw the photos on an earlier post that seems to show double track?

Photos from today at Wolvercote and Walton Well Road, Oxford

 

[swt_passenger]

I thought that, but then I saw the photos on an earlier post that seems to show double track?

They don't both have to be in use at start, I think one side (the down side) will end up with stop blocks fitted somewhere south of Oxford Parkway, and both lines will not be connected at the Oxford end initially. Edited to add that it's explained in sheet 2 of the track diagrams posted a few weeks ago: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2694476&postcount=1699 Two crossovers will be in use.

 

[HowardGWR]

They don't both have to be in use at start, I think one side (the down side) will end up with stop blocks fitted somewhere south of Oxford Parkway, and both lines will not be connected at the Oxford end initially. Edited to add that it's explained in sheet 2 of the track diagrams posted a few weeks ago: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=2694476&postcount=1699 Two crossovers will be in use.

It escapes me why though. Won't it cost to have to change it all later? Forgive me please, if this was also explained somewhere..

 

[jimm]

It escapes me why though. Won't it cost to have to change it all later? Forgive me please, if this was also explained somewhere..

Probably related to what track is actually needed to operate Chiltern's services for the time being. Double track is indeed being installed from just past Oxford North up to Parkway right now - nice an easy with no trains to get in the way.

But there need to be fairly extensive changes at Oxford North junction to install 75mph crossings for trains in both directions, which is in phase 1 - as opposed to the current phase 0 - of Oxford corridor modernisation work, due to be carried out next year. This involves a lot of work on points and track between the north end of Hinksey Yard and Wolvercot Junction (ie Cotswold Line junction), in conjunction with Oxford area resignalling.

 

[RPM]

Yes, that is the situation. The initial arrangement is something of a temporary lash up pending the OXF resignaling. Two tracks will be laid but only one will be in use. Several signals will initially not show their full range of aspects. But it has been done in such a way as to make it quick and easy to go over to the new spec when the time comes. Let's just hope the OXF resignalling schedule doesn't slip because I can see the single line section becoming a bit of a pain when the service goes wrong.