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

[DarloRich]

Curve radius would be the same as going south if done right, you might have to chip away a bit from the flyover but since its not currently in use by anything now would be a good time to do it.

Bridge Clearance, see Curve Radius (two jobs done at once)

Access to TMD would be affected, its not replacing anything, its in addition to.

The sidings would have 30 metres trimmed at most. I don't know what parks there at night so I take your word for it.

If NR can maintain and build tracks like at Shrewsbury station where multiple lines cross each other, they can do it here.


I didn't say this is a viable project, I just see it as the common sense solution to putting a curve where there isn't one currently. I believe that before the end of the world there will be a curve there. It will done at some point. Probably at the most expense once all railways are running.

Its certainly cheaper than knocking down a few buildings and getting another flyover turning right.

it is cheaper and easier just to reverse in platform 5 at Bletchley!

 

[edwin_m]

http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/industry/construction/construction.pdf?pdf=construction

and


http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/pdf/fatalinjuries.pdf

plus data sets for above

http://www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/index.htm

I've just drilled down to the most detailed data (RIDIND table 1) and it doesn't shed any light on the rate of accidents at Network Rail versus general construction sites.

 

[DarloRich]

I've just drilled down to the most detailed data (RIDIND table 1) and it doesn't shed any light on the rate of accidents at Network Rail versus general construction sites.

I have got the NR statistics - I am trying to find them "open source" as all i have seen is v headline: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/4815.aspx or http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/19185/rail-safety-statistics-2014-15.pdf

 

[MarkRedon]

East West Rail now has a very high powered management team in place. It has been announced today that Phil Verster, until now in charge of the ScotRail Network Rail Alliance in Scotland, will become managing director of East West Rail. In his new role, he will report to Rob Brighouse, formerly MD at Chiltern Railways, who will be the chair of the vertically-integrated company to be established to build and operate East West Rail.

According to RTM Rail Technology Magazine http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/rail-news/verster-to-leave-scotrail-for-east-west-rail,

Phil Verster will be leaving his current position as ScotRail’s managing director, which he has held since 2015, to become the MD of the East West Rail project in the spring.

The new East West Rail organisation, announced by the transport secretary Chris Grayling late last year, will oversee the construction and operation of the new Cambridge - Oxford railway line, making it the first fully privatised line in Britain since the mid-1990s.

Verster will help determine how the new East West Rail programme should operate and will report to the project’s chair Rob Brighouse, the former chair of Chiltern Rail.

Other new stories report the same facts but also discuss the criticisms being made of rail performance north of the border. That said, building and opening a completely new railway from Oxford to Bedford and – still not committed – onwards to Cambridge, may well be one of the most exciting jobs on offer in today's British railways.

 

[Oxfordblues]

The new platforms at Oxford Station for Chiltern Railways were completed in time for the 12 December launch, but building work continues behind Platform 1. As trains are running perfectly well, with the new signing-on point and catering buildings complete, could someone please enlighten me what is the purpose of the continuing work?

 

[JamesT]

The new platforms at Oxford Station for Chiltern Railways were completed in time for the 12 December launch, but building work continues behind Platform 1. As trains are running perfectly well, with the new signing-on point and catering buildings complete, could someone please enlighten me what is the purpose of the continuing work?

Possibly related to the work North of the station as per https://www.networkrail.co.uk/running-the-railway/our-routes/western/great-western-mainline/oxford/ ?

 

[MikePJ]

A little bit of progress: a consultation has been announced for the 5th May onwards. Apparently details will be on the web at that time.

 

[absolutelymilk]

According to the site, there would be journeys between Milton Keynes and London Marylebone. Could this route also be used for Virgin to run diversions (with Voyagers) if necessary?

 

[edwin_m]

According to the site, there would be journeys between Milton Keynes and London Marylebone. Could this route also be used for Virgin to run diversions (with Voyagers) if necessary?

In principle I don't see why not. They probably aren't cleared for the route but unlikely to be major difficulties in doing so, and driver route knowledge would be needed but could be done in the same sort of way as their existing diversions are. However the proposed route is via Aylesbury and Princes Risborough and the single line between those points looks likely to remain single so would limit capacity. Voyagers couldn't run via Amersham due to lacking the tripcocks needed for operation on the Metropolitan line.

 

[The Planner]

If someone pays for Virgin to train up then yes, however they have let the Chiltern knowledge lapse so the whole lot will need doing again.

 

[richieb1971]

I hope Theresa May wrote the cheque already.

 

[NickBucks]

According to the site, there would be journeys between Milton Keynes and London Marylebone. Could this route also be used for Virgin to run diversions (with Voyagers) if necessary?

Chiltern regularly advise that there are no additional paths available along the High Wycombe line. Under E-W plans I believe that the existing Marylebone - Aylesbury (via HW) services will simply be extended to Milton Keynes.

 

[work-traveller]

A little bit of progress: a consultation has been announced for the 5th May onwards. Apparently details will be on the web at that time.

Consultation postponed due to the General Election.

 

[DarloRich]

I hope Theresa May wrote the cheque already.

I wonder if the rules of purdah apply?

 

[TheDavibob]

Consultation postponed due to the General Election.

Was wondering if it would be, given it had clearly been designed to follow the council elections.

 

[work-traveller]

Was wondering if it would be, given it had clearly been designed to follow the council elections.

Bet it's annoyed the heck out of the project! Must have been loads of organisation in place already.

 

[KingDaveRa]

I was somewhat mystified that the consultation events they are (were?) doing miss Aylesbury completely, especially considering Aylesbury is a major stop on the route.

 

[alexx]

I was somewhat mystified that the consultation events they are (were?) doing miss Aylesbury completely, especially considering Aylesbury is a major stop on the route.

I would imagine it's about consulting on major changes that'll be happening those areas. For example, Bicester has two level crossings and the bridge on the road into Launton that'll need some major reworking. In Launton itself you're going from a single track line that at peak in the last couple of decades maybe reached one train a day at 30mph to a regular 75mph+ service - not to mention there's a (currently) barrier-less level crossing that'll need to be changed for something a little more suitable.

 

[richieb1971]

I would imagine it's about consulting on major changes that'll be happening those areas. For example, Bicester has two level crossings and the bridge on the road into Launton that'll need some major reworking. In Launton itself you're going from a single track line that at peak in the last couple of decades maybe reached one train a day at 30mph to a regular 75mph+ service - not to mention there's a (currently) barrier-less level crossing that'll need to be changed for something a little more suitable.

If this was the case, why hold off for the election? Sounds more they are scared of policy changes that could affect EWR's timetable and funding.

 

[swt_passenger]

I would imagine it's about consulting on major changes that'll be happening those areas. For example, Bicester has two level crossings and the bridge on the road into Launton that'll need some major reworking. In Launton itself you're going from a single track line that at peak in the last couple of decades maybe reached one train a day at 30mph to a regular 75mph+ service - not to mention there's a (currently) barrier-less level crossing that'll need to be changed for something a little more suitable.

I read a bit on the intended consultation the other day, (before it was deleted), and that was definitely the main thrust of the future consultation. It was more about a number of separate local sessions to deal with footpath diversions and level crossing removals and similar, the sort of thing that was done during the Oxford Bicester works.

I also think they have already done their consultation for the section between Princes Risborough and Aylesbury, and made their final decisions on what work needs doing.

They may not need any infrastructure changes at Aylesbury (or at least none that affect the public).

 

[MK Tom]

Could we rename this thread perchance? It's really a general discussion of the project and not just about the delay from 2019 to 2024.

 

[work-traveller]

If this was the case, why hold off for the election? Sounds more they are scared of policy changes that could affect EWR's timetable and funding.

Not running scared. The project's actions are in accordance with LGA guidance on public consultations in the purdah period immediately before local or national elections.

 

[DarloRich]

If this was the case, why hold off for the election? Sounds more they are scared of policy changes that could affect EWR's timetable and funding.

because they may be obliged to - Civil Servants are bound by certain conduct rules in the period immediately before an election. See here: http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN05262 & https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/election-guidance-for-civil-servants

EDIT - Work Traveler beat me to it while i was looking for the guidelines

 

[MarkRedon]

A long interview in Rail Magazine with Rob Brighouse, NR non-exec board member and MD of the new East West Rail organisation. See:

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/rail-features/east-west-a-new-way-of-working

The interview is remarkable from a number of points of view. It becomes clear that EWR is being established to provide at least a competitive benchmark and just possibly a replacement style of organisation to contrast with Network Rail and its occasional alliances with train operating companies. This is of course very much ideologically attuned to the thinking of Chris Grayling as Secretary of State for Transport. In his initial report, due about now but no doubt subject to election purdah, Rob Brighouse has been asked to draw conclusions on how the pace of construction can be quickened, how costs can be reduced, and how much of the capital cost can be met through private finance. The article mentions a figure of £1 billion plus; I suspect that might get the line as far as Bedford, but certainly would not integrate it into the East Anglian system. Further, he is charged with outlining how the route might be operated by EWR as a single vertically integrated organisation, track and train. The clear intention is to prototype a style of construction and operation which is entirely independent of Network Rail. Apparently Sir Peter Hendy and Mark Carne are both very keen to establish EWR as a non-Network Rail benchmark from which NR is expected to learn.

Rob Brighouse has now largely completed his management team, adding as managing director Phil Verster who then manages Stephen Barker (of Chiltern Railways) and Chris Nicholson (previously a special adviser to the Cabinet).

Brighouse is working both on phase 2, the extension to Bedford but also thinking about the extension to Cambridge. He is clearly not necessarily committed to the putative central section route which Network Rail had been working on, a new route from Bedford to Sandy. This Brighouse and his master Grayling see more in socio-economic terms, as a driver of the Oxford - Milton Keynes - Cambridge arc, than simply as a revived Varsity line supporting a shuttling railcar.

To achieve this, it is probable that some form of DBFO (design, build, finance, operate) with private sector finance and risk apportionment will be favoured in the forthcoming report. Substantial private sector involvement is a sine qua non from Grayling's point of view, much as he has also suggested for the construction of a new London to Brighton mainline; cf. BML2.

Interestingly, the Labour Party manifesto also commits to completion of East-West Rail and to a new Brighton mainline.

 

[mr_jrt]

If the desire is to keep the line separate from NR then that rather suggests options that involve using NR metals are less likely. Does that make a route via Shepreth more or less likely? ...likewise, are we likely to see a resurrection of a separate pair of lines into Oxford?

 

[jimm]

Brighouse is working both on phase 2, the extension to Bedford but also thinking about the extension to Cambridge. He is clearly not necessarily committed to the putative central section route which Network Rail had been working on, a new route from Bedford to Sandy.
This Brighouse and his master Grayling see more in socio-economic terms, as a driver of the Oxford - Milton Keynes - Cambridge arc, than simply as a revived Varsity line supporting a shuttling railcar.

None of which is exactly a revelation - the councils which tried to get this project going in the face of many years of studied indifference from the DfT made the point about the potential economic benefits across the arc from the Thames Valley to East Anglia a very long time ago.

No one ever envisaged just recreating the kind of services that ran on various sections of the Oxford-Cambridge route until the 1960s.

If the desire is to keep the line separate from NR then that rather suggests options that involve using NR metals are less likely. Does that make a route via Shepreth more or less likely? ...likewise, are we likely to see a resurrection of a separate pair of lines into Oxford?

Well that would mean taking out services to Didcot and Reading for starters, which would put a whacking great hole in the socio-economic benefits, and the up side carriage sidings at Oxford are about to be relaid well over to the east side of the formation, so probably not going to be much space left for reviving the LNWR there.

Among the major benefits East West is meant to provide is greater connectivity with the wider national rail network at key points along the route, not create some island state operating in its own little bubble.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I think this would mean that EWR would own and operate the tracks like how Heathrow Airport Holdings own the heavy rail infrastructure used by the Express, Connect and future Elizabeth lines. Their infrastructure is utterly useless without through running onto the NR network, just as any practical EWR route would be.

Of course, as is stated in the article, the real justification for this is ideological. However, for the purpose of funding and managing the reopening of a major railway line I don't see how this is the end of the world, especially if the alternative is that it isn't reopened at all (or delayed significantly). So long as the private operator is not able to skimp on standards which would then make it problematic in future for a public operator to take it over if the experiment failed, then it should at least make sure it gets built.

 

[richieb1971]

Wouldn't connecting stations need to be far apart for it to not have anything to do with NR?

Surely the construction process needs NR certification on certain things!

 

[MK Tom]

I don't know why anyone would interpret this as the services having nothing to do with NR. It's the project management and ownership of infrastructure that's separate. Obviously there will be through-running over NR infrastructure to MK Central, Didcot, High Wycombe and so on, just as there was through-running between different companies up and down the network in the pre-grouping days, and still is today in the heathrow example people keep citing. E-WR will be a company focused on running a railway though - Heathrow is a bit different being owned by an airport operator.

It does raise an interesting question around the design and ownership of the high-level platforms at Bletchley, and whether or not the line from Bletchley to Bedford will pass from NR to E-WR ownership. Either way it won't impact on freight services using that line (although the frequency of passenger services might) any more than it will on E-WR services using the WCML or GWML. It just creates an interesting question of where ownership boundaries will be and how access charges for other operators are worked out between the two infrastructure owners. Perhaps it's time to resurrect the Railway Clearing House

 

[KingDaveRa]

I think it could work with EWR owning it all, and having access to NR's metals where needed. Let's face it, the opposite is already in place for Chiltern using LU's tracks, so I see no reason why a fully vertically-integrated EWR wouldn't run trains down over NR's infrastructure as and when - and vice-versa.

Could get a bit convoluted in terms of access agreements and fees, but then what part of operating a railway these days isn't?