East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

[DarloRich]

It also wasn't part of the masterplan, but was added later. Bletchley and Wolverton were originally considered sufficient, and those train and bus things were so old fashioned in 1960s thinking.

that i did not know! I assumed the centre was part of the plan, if not the snow dome.

I think the location close to the existing WCML meant a station was always going to be built. Imagine the town was the other way round with the centre near Newport Pagnell & the M1 junction. Would we have a station at all?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes, certainly better than a bus service.

The X5 is no simple bus service, it's a very high quality coach service which is vastly superior to an hour in a 3+2 seated, badly vandalised Brummie 150 or a 2+2 midget-seated 153.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

that i did not know! I assumed the centre was part of the plan, if not the snow dome.

The centre was, but the station wasn't.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

'The idea' is indeed what the longer-term scheme is aiming to delivery, i.e. Oxford-Bedford-Cambridge connectivity.

The idea very much includes MK, because it is the largest town on the arc, has significant inward commuting mostly by car, and Oxford-Cambridge is faster via London anyway.

It's basically a rail-based, higher capacity X5. The flows will be broadly similar.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The ideal is to get from Oxford to Bedford direct as possible in the 1st instance.

No, it isn't. There is half of naff all demand for that journey. Look at the loadings on the X5.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As I understand it buses are rubbish at the moment, but does it have to be that way?

The buses are probably best described as average. Certainly improved from the Julian Peddle days in which they indeed were a very basic service indeed.

The main reason they are looked down upon is that because of the clear, high-speed roads and cycleways, other modes are much better than elsewhere.

Indeed, if I had to give up my car, I'd be lost without a bike in MK, or I'd be using a lot of taxis.

And how far is Bletchley from MKC?

About 4 miles I think.

 

[mr_jrt]

that i did not know! I assumed the centre was part of the plan, if not the snow dome.

I think the location close to the existing WCML meant a station was always going to be built. Imagine the town was the other way round with the centre near Newport Pagnell & the M1 junction. Would we have a station at all?

You could have ended up with them completing the line to Wellingborough from Wolverton.

 

[HowardGWR]

Having read all the above, (very interesting), my gut feeling is that EW should ignore MKC for its 'X5' service, only make sure it's really fast and inter-city like, so not an X5, however good that service is. Just have a good local connection (train or bus) into MK.

Cambridge to Oxford in 75 minutes stopping at Bedford and Bletchley only, and other stoppers filling in the gaps.

Isn't that is what is planned?

 

[swt_passenger]

Having read all the above, (very interesting), my gut feeling is that EW should ignore MKC for its 'X5' service, only make sure it's really fast and inter-city like, so not an X5, however good that service is. Just have a good local connection (train or bus) into MK.

Cambridge to Oxford in 75 minutes stopping at Bedford and Bletchley only, and other stoppers filling in the gaps.

Isn't that is what is planned?

No, there are 6 stops intended between Bedford and Oxford in the semi fast service, as per the links to the EWR site a couple of us posted last week.

Ridgemont, Woburn Sands, Bletchley, Winslow, Bicester, Oxford Parkway.

 

[MarkRedon]

Yes, that is what is in the currently published plan. When and if – and it is a rather large if – the railway reaches Cambridge and the existing East Anglia network, it may very well be sensible to recast the whole timetable. One or more fast and frequent interregional services – which I would suggest would have the greatest absolute benefit – may make it impossible to maintain, for example, the current stopping service between Bedford and Bletchley.

Several commentators have been unchallenged on their assertion that it will still be quicker to journey between Cambridge and Oxford via London. This need not and should not be the case. It would be a complete abnegation of vision to build the railway simply to replace the X5 bus service.

I do not know what will be the best interregional services to provide for. One might be an hourly XC service connecting the East Midlands to Reading – but arguably this would be a misuse of the capacity of the new line since that path may well be used by interregional freight (think electric spine). Another might be Cambridge to Bristol – which end-to-end would certainly be slower than travel via London but would offer so many intermediate journey possibilities. My own feeling for the best possible option would be a very frequent service between Cambridge and Didcot with good interchange facilities at Sandy, Bedford South, Bletchley, Bicester and Oxford. The service pattern of trains at each of the interchange points may well evolve considerably as HS2 comes on stream.

 

[The Planner]

E-W would be part of electric spine (if it ever happens, I don't think it will) and there are freight paths built in to E-W already so whatever passenger trains won't be precluding it.

 

[jimm]

No, there are 6 stops intended between Bedford and Oxford in the semi fast service, as per the links to the EWR site a couple of us posted last week.

Ridgemont, Woburn Sands, Bletchley, Winslow, Bicester, Oxford Parkway.

Yes, but that is the plan for when the line is only open as far as Bedford.

There has been no indication of what a timetable for trains on to Cambridge - or anywhere beyond it, such as Stansted - would look like. No wonder, given that they are still deciding what route to take.

Never mind the possibility of an XC-style service to/from the East Midlands joining/leaving the line at Bedford, which one might very well expect to stop only at Bletchley and Bicester (population there is now mid-30,000s and going to grow further with all the new housing going in) on the way to Oxford and beyond.

 

[DarloRich]

Yes, that is what is in the currently published plan. When and if – and it is a rather large if – the railway reaches Cambridge and the existing East Anglia network, it may very well be sensible to recast the whole timetable. One or more fast and frequent interregional services – which I would suggest would have the greatest absolute benefit – may make it impossible to maintain, for example, the current stopping service between Bedford and Bletchley.

Well I am not having that!

If the line is electrified there should be capacity to keep the current service patterns. To cut it back later will mean that markets are lost. There are plans for much more housing along the Vale the majority of which will be for MK overspill. This is where the lack of direct MK - Bedford trains will be most damaging.

Several commentators have been unchallenged on their assertion that it will still be quicker to journey between Cambridge and Oxford via London. This need not and should not be the case. It would be a complete abnegation of vision to build the railway simply to replace the X5 bus service.

but that , to my mind, should be an aim of the project. Get those people onto the train. Lots of them will want to go to MK and opening up Aylesbury and Oxford to commuting to MK will be a bonus. By car it is long and tedious.

My own feeling for the best possible option would be a very frequent service between Cambridge and Didcot with good interchange facilities at Sandy, Bedford South, Bletchley, Bicester and Oxford. The service pattern of trains at each of the interchange points may well evolve considerably as HS2 comes on stream.

the problem with that is that you miss out a direct link to the biggest town in the area. Whilst geography makes that town difficult to serve you are gambling that you can attract more people to long distance services than you loose in shorter distance commuter types. Will that pay off?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the line is electrified there should be capacity to keep the current service patterns. To cut it back later will mean that markets are lost. There are plans for much more housing along the Vale the majority of which will be for MK overspill. This is where the lack of direct MK - Bedford trains will be most damaging.

Agreed, it seems silly to me that we have the capability to provide direct commuter trains to MK from places where MK is the primary place of work, yet we aren't providing them even though it was intended to do so.

The Germans would laugh. As would the Swiss.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Having read all the above, (very interesting), my gut feeling is that EW should ignore MKC for its 'X5' service, only make sure it's really fast and inter-city like, so not an X5, however good that service is. Just have a good local connection (train or bus) into MK.

Cambridge to Oxford in 75 minutes stopping at Bedford and Bletchley only, and other stoppers filling in the gaps.

Isn't that is what is planned?

It'd be stupid if it was. Where is the demand for Oxford to Cambridge direct? MK is the main traffic generator (and will grow further) plus the short journeys at each end.

Don't assume that the existence of the X5 proves such a market. Very, very few people do the end to end journey. It's comparable with Liverpool to Norwich - a fast regional service that runs a long route for a combination of operational convenience and to allow a load of overlapping short journeys. And the primary traffic generators on that route are Manchester, Sheffield and Nottingham.

 

[DarloRich]

there are people who do Cambridge Oxford via the X5: they seem to be tourists.

Most do sections and there is a decent commuter market on that bus (as with the Luton Airport run!)

 

[MarkRedon]

I am not fondly imagining that there will be a huge stream of academics shuttling between the two varsity towns. (Clive Staples Lewis did for a long while do precisely that; but he died on the same day as John F. Kennedy!). The Department for Transport is not alone in seeing the benefits of joining up the knowledge production belt that surrounds and includes London. But that in isolation is not going to create a million journeys a year! The new railway will produce a number of potentially very valuable connection possibilities. It will therefore be intensively used and complicated timetables are likely to lead to severe performance issues. My suggestion of a Cambridge to Didcot shuttle was a little tongue in cheek but would at least perform well, especially after the Oxford south corridor improvements. So, to argue against myself: would something like this, and very definitely not in this order, work well and meet a number of needs?

• One hourly freight path.
• One hourly MKC to - say - Nottingham.
• One hourly Reading to Milton Keynes Central.
• One hourly Milton Keynes Central to Cambridge via Bedford Midland.
• One hourly Didcot to Cambridge.
• One hourly Milton Keynes Central to Marylebone.
• One of the Cambridge services should be extended to Stansted Airport.

To maintain local service for Marston Vale stations, some of the above services to provide skip stop service as can best be timetabled. Peak-hour all stations trains might displace one of the listed services.

I would still argue very strongly for excellent interchange at the points I originally mentioned.

 

[The Planner]

If they go for the incremental timetable for Phase 2, there are more than that just between Claydon and Bletchley, 6tph passenger and 3tph freight in both directions.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Most do sections and there is a decent commuter market on that bus (as with the Luton Airport run!)

The loadings on the 99 are interesting - very low from MKC station to the shopping centre, and very low from Luton town to the Airport. The main flows are weekend shopping ones, and commuters between the stop just off the M1 at Luton and the stop at Kingston serving the large warehouse complexes.

Ironically the latter two stops were inserted only to allow BSOG to be claimed, but are at certain times of day by far the busiest.

TBH they could probably lop the two ends off, saving a bus off the PVR, and not really annoy anyone.

The reason for the almost non-existent airport demand is simply that hourly is not good enough, and the service is not operating when Luton Airport is at its busiest - crack of dawn out, late evening back - and also that the local private hire taxi companies are VERY competitive on fares and offer a much more convenient door to door service.

 

[HowardGWR]

Agreed, it seems silly to me that we have the capability to provide direct commuter trains to MK from places where MK is the primary place of work, yet we aren't providing them even though it was intended to do so.

The Germans would laugh. As would the Swiss.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


It'd be stupid if it was. Where is the demand for Oxford to Cambridge direct?

Don't ask me but that is why it is being built. I assume that the marketing surveys most shew that there is a large untapped market. Besides science, certainly tourism must be a big draw. Circular services were pooh-poohed here a while back, but that was just the local area around Northants and Bucks, but for tourism, how about -

Stratford upon Avon, Oxford, Cambridge, York, Keighley (for Haworth), Carnforth, Wigan (for the pier), Hartford, Stratford upon Avon(terminate).

Perhaps I missed out a few jewels on the way.

 

[work-traveller]

6tph passenger and 3tph freight in both directions.

...although the wider network doesn't have capacity to feed in or receive that many services at peak hours and could struggle at other times.

 

[The Planner]

Which is why it is perceived as the incremental and not the core, it needs other things to achieve it.

 

[richieb1971]

Neil,

Oxford-Bedford as fast as possible (with stops of course) was meant as a straight line route, nothing to do with passenger numbers going from A to Z.


The X5 is road transport, it can't keep timings anywhere near 100% because its at the mercy of road traffic. The 1 distinct advantage trains have is their timetables and ability to own the rails.


I was driving on the A5? the other day heading towards Cheddington and noticed the Marston Vale going over the top. If you had a MK parkway positioned there the A5 would be an extremely quick route into MKC. The surrounding area is just a huge field and a lake. Would make for a very attractive location for a parkway I think.

 

[Class 170101]

I was driving on the A5? the other day heading towards Cheddington and noticed the Marston Vale going over the top. If you had a MK parkway positioned there the A5 would be an extremely quick route into MKC. The surrounding area is just a huge field and a lake. Would make for a very attractive location for a parkway I think.

Flood plain?

 

[richieb1971]

I don't think the A5 has ever flooded in that area.

 

[Class 170101]

I don't think the A5 has ever flooded in that area.

Probably because the grass flooded. If you concrete over this grass then that risk must increase.

 

[The Ham]

Probably because the grass flooded. If you concrete over this grass then that risk must increase.

That depends, assuming that sustainable urban drainage is used (and all new development must) then the discharge rate from the drainage system can not be higher than that of a green field. This can be achieved by many methods, but basically has to store the water on site.

It's been known for other areas if floodplain to be lowered to ref the risk of flooding over an area of land.

It could be done, but there would be a cost associated with it.

 

[DarloRich]

I was driving on the A5? the other day heading towards Cheddington and noticed the Marston Vale going over the top. If you had a MK parkway positioned there the A5 would be an extremely quick route into MKC. The surrounding area is just a huge field and a lake. Would make for a very attractive location for a parkway I think.

That can only be near me. I guess you missed both Fenny Statford and Bow Brickhill stations about half an inch apart? :roll:

The A5 is already a quick route into MK - please just give it up with these silly ideas. PS the land there is listed for further, potential, housing development which will, eventually fill up all the space between the A5 and Bow Brickhill station

Flood plain?

I don't think the A5 has ever flooded in that area.

If it is where i am thinking off the lake is Caldecotte Lake and is a storm attenuation tank so designed to help stop the River Ouzel flooding. It wont flood.

 

[Blamethrower]

That can only be near me. I guess you missed both Fenny Statford and Bow Brickhill stations about half an inch apart? :roll:

The A5 is already a quick route into MK - please just give it up with these silly ideas. PS the land there is listed for further, potential, housing development which will, eventually fill up all the space between the A5 and Bow Brickhill station

.

It's all marked for housing, however, don't know where they would put this new "expressway" they've been talking about on local news if there are houses everywhere.

Apparently A428 from Cambridge to Oxford is set to be a dual carriageway all the way without roundabouts.

 

[richieb1971]

That can only be near me. I guess you missed both Fenny Statford and Bow Brickhill stations about half an inch apart? :roll:

The A5 is already a quick route into MK - please just give it up with these silly ideas. PS the land there is listed for further, potential, housing development which will, eventually fill up all the space between the A5 and Bow Brickhill station





If it is where i am thinking off the lake is Caldecotte Lake and is a storm attenuation tank so designed to help stop the River Ouzel flooding. It wont flood.

Its not so silly an idea. To have a parkway you need room for a car park. With an already existing dual carriageway nearby it makes perfect sense.

I come to the conclusion that in your world nothing can be done unless its cheap as chips, every single person on earth has thought its a good idea except Network rail and that you've been bribed to agree.

I also fear that all land NR could use is ear marked for development of sorts. But better not have something there already than is the case for just about everywhere else in that area. Which has big buidlings surrounding the track.

 

[DarloRich]

Its not so silly an idea.

I am sorry but it IS a silly idea that makes no practical sense!

To have a parkway you need room for a car park. With an already existing dual carriageway nearby it makes perfect sense.

Agreed - but that site makes no sense and to suggest it as a site for a station shows a complete lack of understanding of the area or even of people! From the A5 bridge you refer to I can be at C:MK in 5-10 minutes by car. It is at least 25 by train, if not more. How will you persuade people to make the switch? You could achieve the same by buying the field behind Bow Brickhill station, making it a car park and upgrading the existing roads. I doubt it would be used but would require less investment!

The site you suggested really makes no sense and is constrained by a canal, river, lake main road, distribution warehouse, housing, offices and a single track rail bridge.

I come to the conclusion that in your world nothing can be done unless its cheap as chips, every single person on earth has thought its a good idea except Network rail and that you've been bribed to agree.

Barely even worthy of comment and once again repeats a libelous allegation. Have you any evidence for this claim? It is clear you have absolutely no understanding of how projects are developed and funded or of the funding environment within which NR operate.

I also fear that all land NR could use is ear marked for development of sorts. But better not have something there already than is the case for just about everywhere else in that area. Which has big buidlings surrounding the track.

There are 2 stations there already for goodness sake :roll: Why would you build a third no one would use?

 

[richieb1971]

Darlo,

Your almost getting me to the point where I am going to climb the political ladder just to prove you wrong, on every account.

For your information I have already submitted an idea to my own politician for a station on the Marston Vale. He did not condemn my idea. And thats a REAL politician. But honestly, I don't expect anything to be done about it. But he didn't sound as negative as you.

 

[Bald Rick]

For your information I have already submitted an idea to my own politician for a station on the Marston Vale. He did not condemn my idea. And thats a REAL politician. But honestly, I don't expect anything to be done about it. But he didn't sound as negative as you.

Politicians are renowned for their expertise in transport planning matters. Good luck with your proposal.

 

[DarloRich]

Darlo,

Your almost getting me to the point where I am going to climb the political ladder just to prove you wrong, on every account.

For your information I have already submitted an idea to my own politician for a station on the Marston Vale. He did not condemn my idea. And thats a REAL politician. But honestly, I don't expect anything to be done about it. But he didn't sound as negative as you.

what are you on about? "climb the political ladder"? :roll:

Is it the idea you set out above? I am sure the moment you left the idea went in the special file marked "bin"! Any one able to read a map can see why your suggestion is bonkers. If you were serious about a park and ride type station you would suggest Ridgmont being as it is almost adjacent to junction 13 of the M1 and benefiting from vacant land for your carparks..

Although how you propose to attract people to the trains to make the journey to Milton Keynes escapes me as you, as set out a above, oppose direct services from the Marston Vale line to MK. Instead your suggestion is to offer a bus form Beltchley. How do you propose to attract people to the train when it is much quicker to drive from the site of your station to the centre of Milton Keynes?

BTW Why do you think your "own politician" was polite to you? It wasn't because you have a good idea.............

 

[A0]

Darlo,

Your almost getting me to the point where I am going to climb the political ladder just to prove you wrong, on every account.

Great idea - run for office. The Monster Raving Loony Party need competition for who will come last in elections - you may have found a niche.

For your information I have already submitted an idea to my own politician for a station on the Marston Vale. He did not condemn my idea. And thats a REAL politician. But honestly, I don't expect anything to be done about it. But he didn't sound as negative as you.

DarloRich is spot on - less than 0.5 a mile from where the A5 is crossed by the Marston Vale line are two stations - as this OS Map shows http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?...t=3&tl=Map+of+Fenny+Stratford,+Milton+Keynes+[Town]&searchp=ids.srf&mapp=map.srf

So unless you're proposing the closure of both of those stations and insertion of a new one at about a mid-point, you'd end up with 3 stations with about 1.5 miles separating them....... Which might, just might, work with the London Underground. On the Marston Vale line it's madness.

If a Parkway Station were really that necessary, then there's a huge field next to Bow Brickhill station which is 5 mins from the A5 - that would make much more sense.