Discussion on electrification and the Marlow branch

[mr_jrt]

TBH, the ideal would be to reinstate the link to High Wycombe properly, then you would have traffic going both ways, rather than just feeding down to Maidenhead and the GWML for Reading and London.

 

[snowball]

TBH, the ideal would be to reinstate the link to High Wycombe properly, then you would have traffic going both ways, rather than just feeding down to Maidenhead and the GWML for Reading and London.

Quite a lot of houses and gardens in the way.

 

[mr_jrt]

Quite a lot of houses and gardens in the way.

Well yes, hence why I said "ideal".

Still, demolish the 3-4 buildings east of Bourne End station and that gets you to Woburn Green, divert to the west slightly to miss the old station site development, and then demolish the Euro Carparts site and that largely gets you to Wycombe Marsh. Acquiring a strip from the gardens that remain should be, in the grand scheme of things, fairly easy.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If the average loading is around 19 passengers per trip then maybe the closure of Marlow-Boure End should be considered and that bit being done by bus, then the rest of the time could get electrified

 

[NotATrainspott]

If the average loading is around 19 passengers per trip then maybe the closure of Marlow-Boure End should be considered and that bit being done by bus, then the rest of the time could get electrified

I doubt it. Rather than being evenly spread out during the day, the passenger numbers will come mostly from the peak period. The train would carry the most people at exactly the same time as the road network would be busiest, so bus replacement wouldn't work unless the line were ripped up and replaced with a busway. That might be an option, but presumably an even cheaper option would be just to buy a couple of bogied Parry People Movers and have them shuttle back and forth.

 

[Voglitz]

That might be an option, but presumably an even cheaper option would be just to buy a couple of bogied Parry People Movers and have them shuttle back and forth.

How much is a bogied Parry People Mover?

 

[NotATrainspott]

How much is a bogied Parry People Mover?

http://www.parrypeoplemovers.com/pdf/PPM120INFO.pdf

The PPM120 info sheet says less than £1m per unit. Running costs are tiny in comparison to a full-size train.

Any sort of conversion of the line will cost money. While spending millions on a set of PPMs might look like a lot, it's certainly going to be less than the cost of ripping up the track and laying a bus route.

 

[dviner]

I doubt it. Rather than being evenly spread out during the day, the passenger numbers will come mostly from the peak period. The train would carry the most people at exactly the same time as the road network would be busiest, so bus replacement wouldn't work unless the line were ripped up and replaced with a busway. That might be an option, but presumably an even cheaper option would be just to buy a couple of bogied Parry People Movers and have them shuttle back and forth.

When I used to do the Marlow - Paddington commute, the 7:17 (or equivalent back then) seemed to be quite popular - when it was suddenly substituted with a coach one morning the coach got quite full.

Must say, though, I doubt there's any way you could get from Marlow Station to Bourne End station by car in 7 mins (obeying traffic rules, and with normal traffic levels). Going nutzo on a Hayabusa, however...

 

[reddragon]

In the morning peak, the last 2.5 miles into Bourne End from the A404 Marlow bypass takes longer than my 35 mile drive to the A404 junction when I go there.

You can drive Marlow - Bourne End in the same time it takes the train, but only when the train is as empty as the road.

The space from the reversing point to the platform end will accommodate a 3-car train, measured on a GIS map. You could also slew the tracks to move the point south a bit.

Pity the old curved platform 3 was built on as that would have been ideal for 4 cars!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The space from the reversing point to the platform end will accommodate a 3-car train, measured on a GIS map.

Very doubtful, take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourne_End_railway_station the picture in the info box shows how little room there is when a 2 car train is in, a 3 car would very likely foul the points.

 

[hwl]

Very doubtful, take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourne_End_railway_station the picture in the info box shows how little room there is when a 2 car train is in, a 3 car would very likely foul the points.

That is a 2x 23m train through, only an extra 14m required for 3x20m.

 

[leomartin125]

Well I do not understand how the early morning train, which I saw for myself just yesterday at morning, from Bourne End to Paddington is 5 coaches long and that comes straight off the Marlow Line, am I missing something here? This must be proof that 3 car trains are possible...

 

[Monty]

Well I do not understand how the early morning train, which I saw for myself just yesterday at morning, from Bourne End to Paddington is 5 coaches long and that comes straight off the Marlow Line, am I missing something here? This must be proof that 3 car trains are possible...

Bourne End station has two platforms, platform 1 is the shortest of the two and is the only one that trains can use in order to continue on to Marlow as a reversal is required at Bourne End. Platform 2 however is longer but trains that use it can only go back to Maidenhead.

 

[reddragon]

Bourne End's platform measures out at 80m on GIS from clear of the points to the end of platform. Allowing for the buffers & clearances, that leaves at least 70m.

The photo shows plenty of space either side of the 2-car unit and the buffer stop is some way from the platform end.

If the track from Maidenhead was slewed north west, all within rail land, the point could move south by around 10m. Pity the old branch bay platform has been built over, as it was curved to the west to allow a longer train to fit in.

 

[MarlowDonkey]

Platform 2 however is longer but trains that use it can only go back to Maidenhead.

Old photos from the 1950s show that there used to be a Marlow connection from that platform. It wouldn't help with longer trains as the junction was about two thirds of the way down the platform.

There's a proposal to reinstate this junction to enable two trains an hour to run without having to use the peak hour method of shuttles.

For Branch passengers wishing to go beyond Maidenhead, the key issue is the nature of Maidenhead's service and how well the Branch line services connects with it. I don't think off peak Maidenhead is going to be exclusively all stations Crossrail, but I don't know that the timetable detail has been fleshed out.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

How far clear of the switch blades of the points does the unit have to be for the signal interlocking to allow the points to operate?

 

[FGW_DID]

How far clear of the switch blades of the points does the unit have to be for the signal interlocking to allow the points to operate?

It depends on the length of the track circuit / axle counter section. The train may be well clear of the points but because it still occupies a certain section or overlap, the points will not swing, a signal won't clear, the route won't set.

 

[MarkRedon]

Wycombe District Council discussion on reuse of the Wycombe to Bourne End line-of-route:

http://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co...e-End-and-High-Wycombe-discussed-14062016.htm

The opening of a railway line connecting Maidenhead with High Wycombe has been under discussion – more than 40 years after it was closed.

Proposals to reopen the link were raised at a meeting of Wycombe District Council’s cabinet on Monday, June 6, as councillors debated how best to provide for the needs of a growing population.

Although the Marlow Branch Line allows travel from Maidenhead to Marlow and Bourne End, commuters have no dedicated rail link onwards to High Wycombe.

High Wycombe is already fairly well connected, it it not?

 

[Andyjs247]

I think it makes sense to electrify Maidenhead - Bourne End. The problem is what to do with the last section to Marlow. If the service was split permanently at Bourne End (as it is at peak times now) you could lengthen platforms so that a 4x20 EMU could use the branch. Bourne End is complicated by the junction and limited space between the river and the buffer stops.

One option then could be a PPM shuttle (like Stourbridge) just for Marlow - Bourne End. A nicer solution would be to reopen the line between Bourne End and Wycombe, possibly as light rail or tram-train to give connectivity between Marlow and Wycombe. But the track bed is partially obstructed plus you would need to create a level crossing at Bourne End so it wouldn't be straightforward.

 

[JN114]

The wires will stop at Maidenhead - and unless the platforms can be extended Northward at Bourne End across the former level crossing they will remain stopped at Maidenhead.

My understanding is that the powers that be are seeking funding approval for an "infrastructure enhancement" at Bourne End which will allow a frequency increase at peak times and maintain current service level of Marlow - London with only one change at any time of day.

From discussions with colleagues in the office as to what shape this infrastructure enhancement would likely take, the overwhelming conclusion is that an additional crossover would be constructed to connect the Marlow line to platform 1. The token working would be done away with and the existing "signalling" arrangements would be upgraded to proper signals and recontrolled from TVSC Slough desk. The changes associated with going from a proper groundframe to the mini-panel in the token hut a few years ago was done with such an upgrade in mind. This would then allow 2x 2/165 to operate Maidenhead - Marlow in the peaks, crossing at Bourne End, which increases frequency and maintains the current Marlow - London in 1 change at any time of day arrangement, albeit moving that change from
Bourne End to Maidenhead.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

If the shorter platform was abandoned, could the points be moved a little further away from the buffer stops to allow a 3x20 emu to be used? It would probably need a slight re-alignment of the curve towards Marlow

 

[JN114]

If the shorter platform was abandoned, could the points be moved a little further away from the buffer stops to allow a 3x20 emu to be used? It would probably need a slight re-alignment of the curve towards Marlow

Strictly speaking, if the buffer stop was moved right up to the North End of the platform you could fit 3x 20m coaches in - indeed before the 16x were introduced in the 1990s 3 car 117s occasionally put in appearances on Marlow duties.

Not long after the turbos were introduced one ended up embedded in the platform canopy of the London bay at Slough after approaching the buffer stops a little quick. The result of this was the moving of buffer stops in bay platforms across the Thames Valley away from the ends of the platform to reduce the risk of another overriding incident. While Platform 2 at Bourne End was never long enough for 3/16x, the moving of the buffer stop reduced it to a tight fit for 2/16x which remains today. I suspect modern safety standards would prevent moving the buffer stop back to increase available room.

Abandoning platform 2 won't gain any length - the curve round towards Marlow is already close to the minimum radii passenger stock can negotiate so the best that can be hoped for is a new set of points in platform 1 level with the existing platform 2 points. This would still only allow 2x 23m coaches.

 

[Siemens Staines]

Green 166216 on the Marlow branch today is something of a novelty (minus its centre car)

 

[MarkyT]

If the shorter platform was abandoned, could the points be moved a little further away from the buffer stops to allow a 3x20 emu to be used? It would probably need a slight re-alignment of the curve towards Marlow

3x20m (and certainly 3x18m cl.230) might fit today if the points indicator/signal and any associated train detection boundaries were moved closer to the switch tips. An axle counter sensor could probably be a little closer to the tips than an insulated rail break and in the two trains passing reconfiguration it's possible the points themselves could move a little to achieve 3x20m in both platforms. With a tight stand-back on departure, sighting of the starting signals could be augmented by adding full size or miniature co-acting heads pointing sideways at the cab.

With the current service pattern and 2x23m turbos still around there's little point in doing anything to the layout, or electrifying to Marlow, but the Maidenhead to Marlow two trains an hour project changes things. By providing Marlow with all day half hourly Elizabeth Line connections to central London at Maidenhead, the project could remove the need for the daily peak through workings between Bourne End and Paddington. That in turn means no electrification required to Bourne End either while the turbos are still in use. However the reconfiguration at Bourne End should look seriously at catering for 3x20m trains in both platforms to future proof the investment for eventual replacement stock, whether electric or not.

 

[Mikey C]

I think it makes sense to electrify Maidenhead - Bourne End. The problem is what to do with the last section to Marlow. If the service was split permanently at Bourne End (as it is at peak times now) you could lengthen platforms so that a 4x20 EMU could use the branch. Bourne End is complicated by the junction and limited space between the river and the buffer stops.

One option then could be a PPM shuttle (like Stourbridge) just for Marlow - Bourne End. A nicer solution would be to reopen the line between Bourne End and Wycombe, possibly as light rail or tram-train to give connectivity between Marlow and Wycombe. But the track bed is partially obstructed plus you would need to create a level crossing at Bourne End so it wouldn't be straightforward.

Having to make TWO changes to get from Marlow to London would be pretty unattractive though. At least now it's only 1 change, either at Bourne End or at Maidenhead.

 

[MarkyT]

While Platform 2 at Bourne End was never long enough for 3/16x, the moving of the buffer stop reduced it to a tight fit for 2/16x which remains today. I suspect modern safety standards would prevent moving the buffer stop back to increase available room.

UK now has TPWS buffer stop loops to help control approaching movements. Perhaps that could be factored into risk assessment to allow the buffers to be moved, a little at least.

Abandoning platform 2 won't gain any length - the curve round towards Marlow is already close to the minimum radii passenger stock can negotiate so the best that can be hoped for is a new set of points in platform 1 level with the existing platform 2 points. This would still only allow 2x 23m coaches.

A little tweaking of the alignment under renewal/enhancement of the whole junction might allow a small increase in standage, which with signal sighting measures and a few metres at the buffer end could suffice to accommodate 3 car again.

 

[swt_passenger]

By providing Marlow with all day half hourly Elizabeth Line connections to central London at Maidenhead, the project could remove the need for the daily peak through workings between Bourne End and Paddington...

All the remaining through trains to Bourne End (and Greenford and Henley) are already removed from May 2017 (direct award SLC2 route C5).

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...stern-service-level-commitment-2-22032015.pdf

It's also expressly mentioned in the GW direct award stakeholder brief.

 

[dviner]

A little tweaking of the alignment under renewal/enhancement of the whole junction might allow a small increase in standage, which with signal sighting measures and a few metres at the buffer end could suffice to accommodate 3 car again.

If only Station Road wasn't there...

Demolish the Auction Rooms, Station Cafe and Platform 2, and curve the tracks south - that way you might be able to get enough curve to allow for a 3-car to go from a re-built Platform 2 onto the branch.

Of course, if you could lift the formation up a bit and lower Station Road, you could have the platforms extended as a bridge over Station road, which might give you enough room to get 4 cars on to the Marlow branch.

Mind you, if you lower Station road too much, it'll probably end up underwater every winter.