Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
In 1978-1979 I watched class 86's and 87's on Bletchley station so frequent that in the southern direction I could still see the back of the past train as the next one came into the station on the same track. Quite a sight. 40 odd years later we are worried about a train every 15 minutes with modern signalling.
The planning headway for trains on the fast lines at Bletchley is 3 minutes. A single line cannot have trains following in convoy so will be naturally less efficient. If you were to add a 5th track, you would set the slow lines up such that you had a reversible centre line, a la East Croydon rather than as a separate line for EWR.
I have had my say and still folk can't really tell me why there absolutely must be a connection from Oxford to MKC, where as Cambridge/East can do without. If East can do without and change at Bletchley, then so can Oxford as well.
Completely take MKC out of the equation, because it only unbalances the services between East and West, there isn't any money/space/continguency on the WCML. Bletchley is what 1.5 miles away from MKC? Nuneaton is a major junction and no Avanti trains stop there on a regular basis. The UK doesn't do over taking like I saw in Japan where a 5 minute stop lets a faster train by, something that could easily be accomodated at Bletchley. We are a country that runs by restriction, not inovation.
The UK doesn't hold trains in loops very often because the UK public won't take the train if it does. The UK is physically much smaller than Japan, so things like long dwells in trains have a much greater impact on the competitiveness of trains against other modes.
All a Oxford MKC train is doing is doubling up part of another service that currently runs today. All for the benefit of that little change that nobody wants to do, but its ok for Eastern, but absolutely not for Western folk.
It's feasible to do it from Oxford, it isn't from Bedford. That's a compromise of what we have, what people want, how much money there is to pay for it, and whatever else might be considered.
It was a guess, based on the scoped services. Like tpaul26 stated 2TPH and an aspiration for an Aylesbury service.
So is this 5th and 6th track part of the Oxford service plan? It does seem there is financial bias and investment here. If the WCML doesn't have enough tracks to service Oxford and Aylesbury, just throw money at it until it fits.
It does seem there is financial bias and investment here. If the WCML doesn't have enough tracks to service Oxford and Aylesbury, just throw money at it until it fits.
I agree its wibble if the WCML stretch has no further investment. But the consensus around here by many is that it will need extra tracks. I will admit I am not sure if the extra tracks was off the back of a East-Northbound curve at Bletchley or the proposed Oxford/Aylesbury services.
When EWR services start running in 2024 as per the other thread, we will see actual numbers of passengers and be better positioned to see if EWR team got it right or not.
When EWR services start running in 2024 as per the other thread, we will see actual numbers of passengers and be better positioned to see if EWR team got it right or not.
Indeed. It may not be 'conclusive' as regards 'demand' , eg for Oxford- MK, but it will be informative and evidence on which to build proposals and evaluate them.
I agree with those that see little call for Oxford- Cambridge- the universities in those places tend to specialise in areas the other doesn't. perhaps an admin person may appreciate a wider employment options, or a couple that may live in MK and 'commute' one to each- though many of them will be working from home. perhaps a tourist may 'do' Oxford and Cambridge (how many stone colleges can one 'cop'?) though combining the former with the Cotswolds and/or Shakespeare's Stratford is more likely, or with Bicester Village for retail therapy. A guy 'promised' for years an air service Oxford- Cambridge! LOL?
So easy to spend someone else's (eg taxpayers'?) money.
BTW- what's happening regarding 'England's Economic Heartland' (and paying for it) in relation to 'Levelling Up'?
I agree with those that see little call for Oxford- Cambridge- the universities in those places tend to specialise in areas the other doesn't. perhaps an admin person may appreciate a wider employment options, or a couple that may live in MK and 'commute' one to each- though many of them will be working from home.
There won't be that much traffic between people working at Oxford and Cambridge University. There will be more from the ecosystem of companies that have built up around them. There is a lot of specialisation in science and technology companies, so people have to commute further than normal. If your partner has a similarly specialised career, you might end up living somewhere in the middle. At the moment, both would probably need to drive.
There are no plans for extra tracks to be built between Bletchley and Milton Keynes Central as part of the East West Rail project.
There is probably insufficient capacity to run extra services on the existing infrastructure as things stand.
If additional capacity can be squeezed out, there is likely to be greater demand to/from Oxford and Aylesbury than from Bedford and Cambridge.
Services to/from Oxford and Aylesbury could also run without building a new chord (with associated additional cost and difficulty) and without a reversal en route, which is preferable in operational terms.
I think you need to reread my post a bit more carefully.
I never said which bridge the picture was of. What I *did* say was "MK station - the only possible expansion would be on the west side i.e. between the station and the A5, however, the railway and the A5 are not on the same level - this image from Google Maps gives an idea of the difference and that spare 'gap' is the embankment down to the A5, so you'd need *alot* of earthworks"
Which since the station is between H5 and H6 (if anything is slightly closer to H6), means my statement is perfectly valid. The railway *is* at a higher lever *and* what's left of the gap between the railway and the road is an embankment.
The issue is not about what has already been done, it's about whether or not more could be put in there and since the railway is at a higher level, the embankment would need to be addressed which would not be cheap or easy. This Google Maps sat image shows how much space is left along there.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Rubbish.
From Cambridge or the ECML such links already exist either direct or with a single change at Ely or Peterborough.
From Oxford there are already direct links to the West Mids and North West.
So basically you're talking about Bedford, that's it.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
The above, and historically Milton Keynes was part of Bucks - Bucks, Oxford and Berkshire are geographically "Thames Valley", you've got services like the police which cover these areas as one.
I would argue the road links to the west have always been better than those to the east of MK, in part due to the wider range of destinations that way.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
BIB - you can add to that (and done long before either of those) was the rebuilding of Sandy station to allow the ECML to be 4 track through Sandy. That took out the old Cambridge line formation as well.
"The GN station was considerably rebuilt in the early 1970s to give a 4-track layout throughout (previously there was a short 2-track section through the station itself). There are now platforms on the slow lines only. The Down Slow serves the GNR Down platform and the Down Fast is on the original alignment of the Up line. The Up GNR/Westbound LNW platform has been completely demolished to accommodate the Up Fast and the Up Slow; the new Up platform is approximately on the site of the LNWR alignment (possibly extending back onto the old LNW Eastbound platform). There is no trace whatsoever of the old LNW station. "
Cambridge is well connected to Yorkshire and the North East as you rightly say with a change at Peterborough but connections to Liverpool/Manchester and the North West are woeful. I usually drive from Cambridge to Milton Keynes when I travel to Manchester as it’s about 90 minutes instead of 4 and a half hours from Cambridge.
I think the thing about East West Rail that is so good is that it connects all the lines coming north out of London - creating huge numbers of journey opportunities.
Cambridge is well connected to Yorkshire and the North East as you rightly say with a change at Peterborough but connections to Liverpool/Manchester and the North West are woeful. I usually drive from Cambridge to Milton Keynes when I travel to Manchester as it’s about 90 minutes instead of 4 and a half hours from Cambridge.
I think the thing about East West Rail that is so good is that it connects all the lines coming north out of London - creating huge numbers of journey opportunities.
Slightly misleading - according to NR about 1 in 4 MK to Manchesters are 1h 37m, the other 3 are 1h 45m - 1h 50m. Add on 60 minutes to drive from Cambridge to MK (Google Maps) and you're getting on for 3 hours.
And I suspect Cambridge - MK will end up being a 60 minute journey even post EWR.
Cambridge is well connected to Yorkshire and the North East as you rightly say with a change at Peterborough but connections to Liverpool/Manchester and the North West are woeful. I usually drive from Cambridge to Milton Keynes when I travel to Manchester as it’s about 90 minutes instead of 4 and a half hours from Cambridge.
I think the thing about East West Rail that is so good is that it connects all the lines coming north out of London - creating huge numbers of journey opportunities.
Indeed. The road Cambridge to MK is already quite good for a cross country route, and will be even better once Caxton Gibbet to the Black Cat is sorted (in this part of the world we know how to name our roundabouts). Anyone with a car is likely to drive to Milton Keynes to get from Cambridge to Liverpool or Manchester, only those without cars, and unable to afford to go via London, are stuck on the EMR train from Ely.
The train is going to have to be good to get modal shift from road to rail between Cambridge and MK. It is a different story Cambridge-Oxford, it is a long while since I've been that way but I think the road from MK to Oxford is still rubbish?
Indeed. According to the 2021 Consultation Document, target maximum journey time for Oxford-Cambridge is 95 mins. Oxford-MK is 45 mins, so Oxford-Bletchley must be around 40 mins.
Implying Bletchley-Cambridge will be 55 minutes. So well over an hour to get from Cambridge to Milton Keynes Central.
Indeed. The road Cambridge to MK is already quite good for a cross country route, and will be even better once Caxton Gibbet to the Black Cat is sorted (in this part of the world we know how to name our roundabouts). Anyone with a car is likely to drive to Milton Keynes to get from Cambridge to Liverpool or Manchester, only those without cars, and unable to afford to go via London, are stuck on the EMR train from Ely.
The train is going to have to be good to get modal shift from road to rail between Cambridge and MK. It is a different story Cambridge-Oxford, it is a long while since I've been that way but I think the road from MK to Oxford is still rubbish?
EWR isn't about making it cheaper to do random Origin/Destination pairs, nor is it about enhancing North West - East Anglia connections for people who make 1 trip every 4-6 weeks.
EWR isn't about making it cheaper to do random Origin/Destination pairs, nor is it about enhancing North West - East Anglia connections for people who make 1 trip every 4-6 weeks.
Spoilsport introducing facts like that which will p--s on some people's chips.
And such a lack of ambition as well - what's the point in building such a line if a crayonista trackbasher can't undertake a direct journey from Attleborough to Didcot for which there *must* be demand for at least 1 journey a year....
It seems to me that reasonable interchange with medium-distance services on every line it crosses is a good place to aim for, and will generate some extra journeys at little extra cost. This looks set to be achieved everywhere except Bicester, where it's not really practicable and the amount of potential interchange is probably pretty limited anyway.
Given the alternative routes that exist, I suggest it's not justified for EWR to go out of its way to interchange with longer-distance trains that wouldn't otherwise stop at the stations where the lines naturally meet. There may be an exception at Bedford, as East Midland to Oxford and beyond is a journey that's quite awkward by rail. However if HS2 is proposed as now delivered, I think one consequence will be the return of Bedford stops to some Nottingham/Sheffield trains.
If there is a case for through running from the east to Milton Keynes, then it would be driven mainly by journeys starting/ending at that station, not by interchange.
It seems to me that reasonable interchange with medium-distance services on every line it crosses is a good place to aim for, and will generate some extra journeys at little extra cost. This looks set to be achieved everywhere except Bicester, where it's not really practicable and the amount of potential interchange is probably pretty limited anyway.
Given the alternative routes that exist, I suggest it's not justified for EWR to go out of its way to interchange with longer-distance trains that wouldn't otherwise stop at the stations where the lines naturally meet. There may be an exception at Bedford, as East Midland to Oxford and beyond is a journey that's quite awkward by rail. However if HS2 is proposed as now delivered, I think one consequence will be the return of Bedford stops to some Nottingham/Sheffield trains.
If there is a case for through running from the east to Milton Keynes, then it would be driven mainly by journeys starting/ending at that station, not by interchange.
The only stop which EMR would consider "worth" having is Luton Airport Parkway - for obvious reasons.
I'd be more inclined to bet on wiring to Leicester and a Leicester "semi-fast" using 360s (or similar) and calling all stops to Bedford, then Luton and London - akin to the LNW Crewe service or the Thameslink / GN Peterborough services which stop at Stevenage and Hitchin and then all points to Peterborough.
With HS2 access from Oxford to the East Mids (Nottingham / Derby / Sheffield) will be quicker via Birmingham and HS2.
There seem to be no end of people trying to conjure up justifications for Bedford to "regain" it's "Inter City" services to the north - they're barking at the moon. Bedford's now in the position places like Huntingdon or Northampton are in - they will be served by 'regional' EMU based services. There isn't the traffic to / from Bedford to justify anything else and EWR doesn't change that with HS 2 in the offing.
There seem to be no end of people trying to conjure up justifications for Bedford to "regain" it's "Inter City" services to the north - they're barking at the moon. Bedford's now in the position places like Huntingdon or Northampton are in - they will be served by 'regional' EMU based services. There isn't the traffic to / from Bedford to justify anything else and EWR doesn't change that with HS 2 in the offing.
I don't know about Huntingdon, but if Northampton was on the mainline rather than effectively a separate branch I would be surprised if it didn't have IC calls, though probably only 1tph of either Brum or Manc as per Watford Junction. It's over twice the size of Rugby and more important, and that does.
I don't know about Huntingdon, but if Northampton was on the mainline rather than effectively a separate branch I would be surprised if it didn't have IC calls, though probably only 1tph of either Brum or Manc as per Watford Junction. It's over twice the size of Rugby and more important, and that does.
Even post HS2, Northampton's not going to get the equivalent to Avanti services according to the published plans.
And if the MML has capacity freed up by sending Nottingham or Sheffield services that way (currently 2tph each to St Pancras) then there is going to be a demand to use those paths for something different, so it won't be a 'semi fast via the MML reinstating stops at places like Bedford because that wouldn't change anything in terms of freeing up capacity. So I'd bet on a semi-fast Leicester service coming in - because Leicester doesn't benefit from HS2 and a fast Leicester - London. Beyond that - no bet.
bspahh said: There won't be that much traffic between people working at Oxford and Cambridge University. There will be more from the ecosystem of companies that have built up around them. There is a lot of specialisation in science and technology companies, so people have to commute further than normal. If your partner has a similarly specialised career, you might end up living somewhere in the middle. At the moment, both would probably need to drive.
Good point actually - I would foresee this being quite economically useful for MK in a small way, I know of quite a few academics (and this applies equally to many other university and university-related staff I'm sure) who commute enormous distances by car, because while working in the university sector has many advantages, one of the downsides is you get almost no choice where you work. Bletchley might well experience an unexpected outbreak of upmarket coffee shops if the line ever makes it to Cambridge. (Not saying that's a reason to build the line in itself of course)
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I agree 100% about it being 'not fair' about Oxford getting the MK trains and not Bedford - unfortunately geography just isn't fair, and people have to cope with that!
But I actually wonder about that last statement - greater demand from Oxford and Aylesbury is true for the longer distance services, but for commuter demand - just looking at where the large volumes of houses are here (or to be more accurate, the very tiny numbers of houses on the route toward Oxford before you hit Bicester) - Bedford + Marston Vale I would have thought would be comfortably busier in rush hour *if* there were a service which didn't involve a lengthy wait for a change at Bletchley.
There are a lot of quite negative (or realist, in their eyes) people on this thread dictating what EWR is for and isn't for.
Two things here - firstly, it is for a multitude of users and purposes. There is no definitive ordained purpose. So let's stop gaslighting people. It's for Oxford AND Cambridge, AND MK. Those economies and the population boom at the latter. And other places too will benefit. Bedford may well become a much more appealing place for business and leisure, in time.
And secondly, the users themselves will determine how it is used and what it EWR is truly for. We have had a lot of unforeseen and runway successes with new infrastructure on the railways (and some lacklustre surprises too) - and a lot of folks proven wrong on openings, new stations and so forth. So certain posters here should crow and preach a bit less, and let's see how it performs and is used by the general public.
Somebody travelling from Cambridge to Manchester 10x per year is definitely an important use case. There may be many of him. People travel to airports or Bicester 1-2x per year, and investment is geared to that. We have to wait and see. There is business, commuting, education, tourism, recreation - in every direction and peak/offpeak/weekend. All will be different. And direct journeys vs new connections. MKC will definitely play an important part in connecting various places with a quicker service to Crewe/North Wales and Manchester especially.
And if the WCML slow tracks between Bletchley and MKC are seen as insufficient for Oxford, Aylesbury (not holding breath) and any Cambridge reversers - then a case will be put together and it would be a later phase of investment - but from a general NR ownership, vs EWR scope, I would imagine. Gotta keep the scope lean.
Well it's helpful to see what the definition of it is, helpfully Network Rail have this statement:
"How the East West Rail project will make travel across Britain easier
The East West Rail scheme will re-establish a rail link between Cambridge and Oxford to improve connections between East Anglia and central, southern and western England."
Not really - I clarified *what* the "official" (i.e. Network Rail) view of what EWR is for, which is how the project will then be focused.
Anything outside that is technically "out of scope" - so whilst some people may have other views on what it should be, those will no doubt have been considered and discounted as unviable or unachievable.
Not really - I clarified *what* the "official" (i.e. Network Rail) view of what EWR is for, which is how the project will then be focused.
Anything outside that is technically "out of scope" - so whilst some people may have other views on what it should be, those will no doubt have been considered and discounted as unviable or unachievable.
To be fair that brochure will be partly a PR exercise. If you read the route scoping report for the central section, there was a huge emphasis on potential for commuting for example, because it's key to viability, and I think there was a fair bit of thought given to the potential for connections for onward travel.
But, I agree fundamentally about the MK-Bedford curve idea - although not because I think the reasons for wanting it are silly, it's just that it seems to me that it's not really necessary, if you can squeeze a reversal at Bletchley into the timetable.
To be fair that brochure will be partly a PR exercise. If you read the route scoping report for the central section, there was a huge emphasis on potential for commuting for example, because it's key to viability, and I think there was a fair bit of thought given to the potential for connections for onward travel.
But, I agree fundamentally about the MK-Bedford curve idea - although not because I think the reasons for wanting it are silly, it's just that it seems to me that it's not really necessary, if you can squeeze a reversal at Bletchley into the timetable.
Commuting yes - but commuting tends to be shorter distance. I don't for a minute imagine there are trainloads of commuters wanting to travel from Bedford to Manchester on a daily basis for example. In fact the numbers heading to Leicester from Bedford when there used to be a direct service were insignificant. The average commute distance (in 2019) was ~ 20 miles https://www.sme-news.co.uk/new-surv... respondents, the average,over 42 miles a day.
So Oxford to MK at ~40 miles is on the higher than average side, Bedford to MK at about 20 miles is pretty much on the average.
I suspect there will be almost no Oxford <-> MK commuting, but rather potentially business and leisure day-trips. You are likely to get commuting from Bicester and Winslow to/from both to some extent, though, leaning heavily towards the nearer one of the two.
Bicester was tiny 20 years ago - it has had (and continues to have) very significant additional housing developments added all the time, and is now a medium town, not to mention that it is also a railhead for surrounding areas.
Winslow is fairly tiny though it will again act as a railhead. I suspect there will also be additional development.
Certainly the case for that part of EWR (the cheaper part to build) is as strong as a significant number of existing lines around the North. The case for Bedford-Cambridge may of course be weaker due to it being a complete new build.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
