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

[work-traveller]

Interesting movement tomorrow from Aylesbury-Calvert-Bicester-Oxford Parkway, and then back again:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/U50699/2016/03/31/advanced

 

[mr_jrt]

Won't happen - for the same reason that West Coast services won't be stopped at Bletchley once EWR is up and running.

The simple fact is there are already 2 southern 'railheads' for East Coast services - Stevenage and Peterborough.

Sandy is 3 stops from either.

The number of stops is largely irrelevant - it's the distance that's important, and for that St. Neot's makes far more sense than Sandy. That it also provides for a better catchment area for a new line along the A428 corridor is by the by.

 

[D365]

That it also provides for a better catchment area for a new line along the A428 corridor is by the by.

The only locations of interest on a St Neots-Cambridge alignment are Cambourne and Trumpington (P+R), so unless there's a long-term aspiration to provide a station at the former (which I haven't known about), or the plans for a garden city are back on the table, then there wouldn't be much of an a advantage.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Won't happen - for the same reason that West Coast services won't be stopped at Bletchley once EWR is up and running.

The simple fact is there are already 2 southern 'railheads' for East Coast services - Stevenage and Peterborough.

Sandy is 3 stops from either.

With West Coast they will continue to use MKC for such stops and not bother with adding Bletchley in.

MK is very close to Bletchley, to the point where it would be absolutely pointless to begin stopping there.

On the other hand, the distance from Sandy to either Stevenage or Peterborough is a standard distance for the southern ECML. I'm not suggesting it becomes a principle stop or anything, either.

 

[A0]

The number of stops is largely irrelevant - it's the distance that's important, and for that St. Neot's makes far more sense than Sandy. That it also provides for a better catchment area for a new line along the A428 corridor is by the by.

That's as maybe, but St Neots isn't going to suddenly become the ECML's 'southern railhead' in place of Peterborough or Stevenage either.

Both Peterborough and Stevenage are established in their role and the advent of EWR will do nothing to change that fundamentally.

And yes, I've heard the arguments about people using EWR to access the ECML but the fact is there simply isn't going to be the demand to start making significant changes to the ECML's services.

For people in Cambridge it opens up a third route to the ECML but not a particularly useful one - they currently have direct access to both Stevenage and Peterborough.

For Bedford it provides access which currently isn't easy or requires a convoluted journey via Leicester.

For WCML again, it may streamline some of the more convoluted journeys but for the 'destinations' on the ECML such as Leeds, York or Newcastle it will still be easier and possibly quicker to tap into the XC services at places like Tamworth.

 

[The Planner]

Interesting movement tomorrow from Aylesbury-Calvert-Bicester-Oxford Parkway, and then back again:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/U50699/2016/03/31/advanced

Nowt special, it is just a train for East West phase 2 people at NR and Chiltern to go out and look at the route.

 

[Blamethrower]

As far as I can tell, the juicy stuff is yet to come

Lets get juicy!!! (although A0wen won't like it)

Potential Bedford setups:

• Reverse at Bedford
• Change St Johns to be a larger interchange moving platforms between the 2 diverging lines
• Create Bedford Parkway near Wixams
• create a grade separated junction where EWR crosses the MML so that Thameslink services run via St Johns Interchange

Given they have chosen this corridor there is also still the possibility of going round the north of Bedford and re-joining the old rail corridor near Blunham.

I'll be interested to hear how much of the original line they use due to Blunham, Sandy, Potton, Trumpington being built on the old formation.

Personally I'd go for a dive-under tunnel (Like Hollandsche-Diep) at Trumpington and Potton, Sandy - diversion into the old platforms, Blunham - simple diversion starting here to avoid the new estate at Sandy.

So many options...... rubs hands

 

[work-traveller]

Nowt special, it is just a train for East West phase 2 people at NR and Chiltern to go out and look at the route.

Would you know if there's been anything other than freight traffic north of AVP (other than occasional Class 121's to Quainton Road) and east of Gavry Jct. in recent years?

 

[A0]

Lets get juicy!!! (although A0wen won't like it)

Potential Bedford setups:

• Reverse at Bedford
• Change St Johns to be a larger interchange moving platforms between the 2 diverging lines
• Create Bedford Parkway near Wixams
• create a grade separated junction where EWR crosses the MML so that Thameslink services run via St Johns Interchange

Given they have chosen this corridor there is also still the possibility of going round the north of Bedford and re-joining the old rail corridor near Blunham.

I'll be interested to hear how much of the original line they use due to Blunham, Sandy, Potton, Trumpington being built on the old formation.

Personally I'd go for a dive-under tunnel (Like Hollandsche-Diep) at Trumpington and Potton, Sandy - diversion into the old platforms, Blunham - simple diversion starting here to avoid the new estate at Sandy.

So many options...... rubs hands

I don't have a problem with people speculating about the route - from a practical perspective building at Sandy and Blunham means that a workaround needs to be found somewhere - I suspect a diversion at Blunham then come in to the north of Sandy - it looks like there's enough space on the east side of the ECML for two further tracks after which the old alignment could be picked up.

What I don't get is the kind of wibble about 'lets introduce a Cambridge - Huntingdon - Peterborough service or equally pointless let's start a Bedford - Stevenage - Hertford - KX service'. Or worse still, let's make Sandy the ECML southern railhead - when you can get to Stevenage in 20m and Peterborough in 30m from Sandy already.

 

[RPM]

Would you know if there's been anything other than freight traffic north of AVP (other than occasional Class 121's to Quainton Road) and east of Gavry Jct. in recent years?

There's been at least two runs this week from Aylesbury to Oxford Parkway via Calvert using the Chiltern green bubble car. Route refresher runs for the handful of Chiltern drivers who sign that route.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Or worse still, let's make Sandy the ECML southern railhead

Nobody is proposing this. That's just what you've chosen to read into it.

 

[A0]

Nobody is proposing this. That's just what you've chosen to read into it.

I'm merely pre-empting that someone will actually make that suggestion.

But you've come about as close as possible to suggesting it without actually doing so.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I'm merely pre-empting that someone will actually make that suggestion.

But you've come about as close as possible to suggesting it without actually doing so.

Hardly. I've suggested something that fits with the current practice on the southern ECML anyway, and you have interpreted this as replacing Peterborough or some other such rubbish.

 

[A0]

Hardly. I've suggested something that fits with the current practice on the southern ECML anyway, and you have interpreted this as replacing Peterborough or some other such rubbish.

Would you care to explain how what you're suggesting "fits with the current practice on the southern ECML" please?

Since electrification (and a bit before that I think) the only services which have stopped at the intermediate stations between Stevenage & Peterborough have been 'suburban' ones. Go back far enough and Huntingdon and Hitchin both received inter city services stopping but that's not been for many years.

If you're referring to the stations between Peterborough & York - then I'd argue they are very different to the stations south of Peterborough, because they've never been part of the Kings Cross commuter / stopper services.

 

[TheKnightWho]

Would you care to explain how what you're suggesting "fits with the current practice on the southern ECML" please?

Since electrification (and a bit before that I think) the only services which have stopped at the intermediate stations between Stevenage & Peterborough have been 'suburban' ones. Go back far enough and Huntingdon and Hitchin both received inter city services stopping but that's not been for many years.

If you're referring to the stations between Peterborough & York - then I'd argue they are very different to the stations south of Peterborough, because they've never been part of the Kings Cross commuter / stopper services.

I would invite you to read what I actually wrote.

 

[A0]

I would invite you to read what I actually wrote.

I did.

You wrote two things:

"Not if the station's importance were increased because of this. The odd East Coast service stopping there wouldn't be too outrageous - the distance between it and the stations that would be on the route either side are par for the course on the southern ECML."

And

"I've suggested something that fits with the current practice on the southern ECML "

Which on my understanding of what happens on the southern section of the ECML simply isn't the case.

Even if you increased the importance of Sandy, you wouldn't justify stopping VTEC services there - I reiterate for the last 30 or so years there have been only two southern stations which have regularly received Inter City (or its successors) services - Peterborough and Stevenage.

It was a conscious decision by BR to consolidate it to those two stations - indeed if anything Stevenage sees even fewer nowadays, mainly just the Leeds services.

To start adding random VTEC stops at Sandy (or anywhere else for that matter) isn't going to happen.

If I've misunderstood the point you're making then can I suggest your posts aren't clear enough?

 

[MedwayValiant]

Out of idle curiosity, when did InterCity stop calling at Huntingdon? Did that happen when Hitchin - Peterborough was electrified, and so Huntingdon got a regular electric service to KX?

My father writes in from time to time to suggest that the Retford slows should stop at St Neots. That's purely out of self interest and he doesn't really expect it ever to happen, but there's probably more of a commercial case for it than for Sandy.

 

[TheKnightWho]

I did.

You wrote two things:

"Not if the station's importance were increased because of this. The odd East Coast service stopping there wouldn't be too outrageous - the distance between it and the stations that would be on the route either side are par for the course on the southern ECML."

And

"I've suggested something that fits with the current practice on the southern ECML "

Which on my understanding of what happens on the southern section of the ECML simply isn't the case.

Even if you increased the importance of Sandy, you wouldn't justify stopping VTEC services there - I reiterate for the last 30 or so years there have been only two southern stations which have regularly received Inter City (or its successors) services - Peterborough and Stevenage.

It was a conscious decision by BR to consolidate it to those two stations - indeed if anything Stevenage sees even fewer nowadays, mainly just the Leeds services.

To start adding random VTEC stops at Sandy (or anywhere else for that matter) isn't going to happen.

If I've misunderstood the point you're making then can I suggest your posts aren't clear enough?

That might have been because there wasn't a major East-West intercity rail link stopping there. I'm not suggesting the service starts tomorrow.

Do we usually retain stopping patterns because they've happened for a long time, even if we build a large interchanging railway? We should get some new transport planners if so!

Simply saying "no" without actually providing an explanation isn't a very good argument, unfortunately.

 

[A0]

Out of idle curiosity, when did InterCity stop calling at Huntingdon? Did that happen when Hitchin - Peterborough was electrified, and so Huntingdon got a regular electric service to KX?

My father writes in from time to time to suggest that the Retford slows should stop at St Neots. That's purely out of self interest and he doesn't really expect it ever to happen, but there's probably more of a commercial case for it than for Sandy.

I believe it was after electrification - as the journey times and frequencies improved massively when that happened.

My understanding is the main service which served Huntingdon was a KX - York 'sweeper' service that was one of the last loco hauled services before going over to an HST in around 1983. I believe the stopping pattern was something like Stevenage, Huntingdon, Peterboro, Grantham, Newark, Retford, Selby, Doncaster, York. Happy to be corrected though.

 

[Julia]

My father writes in from time to time to suggest that the Retford slows should stop at St Neots. That's purely out of self interest and he doesn't really expect it ever to happen, but there's probably more of a commercial case for it than for Sandy.

And more than Huntingdon too, given that the whole of the area between the ECML and the A428 bypass is to be filled in with housing in the next few years (adding 10-12k more population).

 

[The Ham]

To start adding random VTEC stops at Sandy (or anywhere else for that matter) isn't going to happen.

...until HS2 opens and reduces the number of long distance passengers, at which point an extra stop or two at some key stations could provide extra passenger flows to compensate for those lost to HS2.

Basicly if the very fast trains (those that only call at a combination of York, Newcastle and Edinburgh) are replaced with services which call at Potters Bar, Stevenage, Sandy, Huntingdon, Peterborough, Grantham, Newark, Doncaster, York before potentially running up to Edinburgh (also calling at most key stations) then it would be used for lots of shorter journeys. It would then free up some capacity on the commuter services, as such it would be a very useful service to run.

 

[NotATrainspott]

HS2 Phase 2 will make it possible to completely re-write the ECML timetable, so stopping at Sandy wouldn't be an issue. If there's no lucrative long distance traffic on the line through Sandy the added revenue from calling at the interchange for onward traffic to the EWR network will probably be high enough to make it worthwhile.

 

[MedwayValiant]

And more than Huntingdon too, given that the whole of the area between the ECML and the A428 bypass is to be filled in with housing in the next few years (adding 10-12k more population).

It would be a stronger case if St Neots station were not a mile from the town centre, but there's nothing we can do about that. But already St Neots / Eaton Socon is a larger town than Huntingdon, and once those new developments are built it will also be a larger town than Hitchin. The case will only get stronger, and my dad will be pleased if he's still around to see it!


Now, a vague memory. I seem to remember that at some point (late 80s, probably) there was one service in the am peak which ran Pboro - Huntingdon - St Neots - Sandy - Biggly - Hitchin - fast KX, and which was operated by a 125. Did it really exist, and if so why?

 

[Doctor Fegg]

Perhaps the more interesting question is how this changes Sandy.

Right now: small, pleasant enough market town, population 10,000, 48 minutes to Kings Cross.

In 10 years' time: 20 to 25 minutes direct by rail to Cambridge (plus Cambridge North and Cambridge South/Addenbrookes), a booming city with a drastic shortage of affordable property.

If I were a farmer with land near Sandy, I'd be rubbing my hands right now. And if you double Sandy's population, you in turn improve the case for a better ECML service.

 

[work-traveller]

There's been at least two runs this week from Aylesbury to Oxford Parkway via Calvert using the Chiltern green bubble car. Route refresher runs for the handful of Chiltern drivers who sign that route.

Interesting (to me anyway) - thanks for the response (& that from Mr 'The Planner').

 

[TheBigD]

Now, a vague memory. I seem to remember that at some point (late 80s, probably) there was one service in the am peak which ran Pboro - Huntingdon - St Neots - Sandy - Biggly - Hitchin - fast KX, and which was operated by a 125. Did it really exist, and if so why?

Prior to electrification a number of loco hauled Peterborough - Kings Cross commuter trains ran... Usually formed of a class 47 and up to 12 Mk1's other classes frequently turned up and substitutions with a HST set wasn't that uncommon...

Indeed a HST set was used a couple of times to form the early morning Stamford-Peterborough service vice DMU before doing one of the commuter trains to Kings Cross... A HST was even turned via the Fletton flyash loop on one occasion...

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I believe the "new" ECML franchise has a commitment for an hourly Huntingdon call from the major recast that the great value for money IEP trains brings (presumably on the Leeds axis) .

Course , I may be totally wrong in this ....

 

[al green]

Sandy is fine as an interchange - and from a journey time perspective for Bedford - Cambridge it's easily the best option.

As I've pointed out before, if you were to go via Hitchin you'd be looking at circa 20 mins to cover Bedford - Hitchin and circa 25 mins to cover Hitchin - Cambridge.

Via Stevenage would be even worse as you'd be looking at circa 20 mins to cover Bedford - Luton another 20 mins for whatever new line you'd need from Luton - Stevenage and then 35 mins from Stevenage to Cambridge.

Both of those journeys would be slower than the current Stagecoach X5 coach is.

Whereas the via Sandy option is about 30 miles as the crow flies - on an average speed of 60mph you'd cover it in 30 mins - which is entirely viable given a current Hitchin - Kings Cross service (which is pretty much 30 miles) with 2 stops (Stevenage & FP) is timed for 32 mins.

Do you make up all of your "facts"?

Firstly the suggesed route via Luton does not go to Bedford. It's bletchley, Milbrook, new chord to MML, Luton, Stevenage, etc.

You claim Bedford, Hitchin Cmabridge would take 45 mins. You then claim thats longer than the X5 bus takes. The X5 takes 75 mins from Bedford to Cambridge. Last time I checked 75 is greater than 45 not less. So a train via Hitchin would still be much faster than the X5 bus.

 

[Class 170101]

Not if the station's importance were increased because of this. The odd East Coast service stopping there wouldn't be too outrageous - the distance between it and the stations that would be on the route either side are par for the course on the southern ECML.

Problem is Sandy only has platforms on the slow lines so there will be an extra penalty crossing fast to slow and back over again.

 

[jopsuk]

Depending upon the route E-W rail takes at Sandy, the station may need a total rebuild anyway