East-West Rail link

[swt_passenger]

IIRC the part of the route shown in the video was brought up to scratch within the last ten years or so, in connection with working engineers trains - possibly for WCML work?

But it isn't representative of the mothballed part of the route at all...

 

[MK Tom]

Walk down a disused line with the track lifted. That represents the mothballed parts. Gyppos ripped up a lot of the track, but even where it remains the sleepers have rotted away, the rails warped and twisted. Complete new build required from Newton Longville to Claydon.

 

[jimm]

Walk down a disused line with the track lifted. That represents the mothballed parts. Gyppos ripped up a lot of the track, but even where it remains the sleepers have rotted away, the rails warped and twisted. Complete new build required from Newton Longville to Claydon.

And a great deal of work required the rest of the way to Oxford as well. Current speed limit is something like 45mph, hence the long journey time between Oxford and Bicester Town, and the embankments on that section aren't in great shape in many places either.

I'm sure someone will know what state Aylesbury Parkway to Calvert and Claydon is in, but as it's freight only at present, I expect you are looking at some heavy-duty work on that part as well to get it up to passenger standard.

 

[Trog]

Why? Its an under bridge. Simply raise the level of the track on the bridge by maybe 0.5m and the parapets accordingly.

Have you considered what the added dead load on the bridge would be?
The structures people usually start sucking their teeth if you ask for a 2" track lift. Anyway for the sort of lift you are suggesting the answer is to raise the bridge deck by building up the abutments. You would also need to check that there was enough width of railway land to allow for the fact that generally speaking a taller embankment is a wider embankment.

 

[al green]

I'm sure someone will know what state Aylesbury Parkway to Calvert and Claydon is in, but as it's freight only at present, I expect you are looking at some heavy-duty work on that part as well to get it up to passenger standard.

I've travelled over it twice in the last couple of years on specials operated by Chiltern for EWRL events. Speed is limited to about 20mph.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Have you considered what the added dead load on the bridge would be?
The structures people usually start sucking their teeth if you ask for a 2" track lift. Anyway for the sort of lift you are suggesting the answer is to raise the bridge deck by building up the abutments. You would also need to check that there was enough width of railway land to allow for the fact that generally speaking a taller embankment is a wider embankment.

Its a modern bridge. The road underneath was only built in 1970s. It could be built up with something like breeze blocks, ie light but strong. Lots of space for taller/wider embankment.

 

[MK Tom]

A section of the Aylesbury line past Waddesdon was recently rebuilt for taller freight. It'd be interesting to know if that was done to passenger standards or if it'll be torn up and redone in a year or two...

 

[RPM]

Walk down a disused line with the track lifted. That represents the mothballed parts. Gyppos ripped up a lot of the track, but even where it remains the sleepers have rotted away, the rails warped and twisted. Complete new build required from Newton Longville to Claydon.

For example: http://www.flickr.com/photos/rpmarks/11433372205/

 

[IKBrunel]

Walk down a disused line with the track lifted. That represents the mothballed parts. Gyppos ripped up a lot of the track, but even where it remains the sleepers have rotted away, the rails warped and twisted. Complete new build required from Newton Longville to Claydon.

Do you have any evidence this crime was committed by members of the traveller community or are you just trotting out a cultural stereotype?

 

[MK Tom]

Do you have any evidence this crime was committed by members of the traveller community or are you just trotting out a cultural stereotype?

It's what I've been told... But I probably should've said 'metal theives'. Apologies.

 

[al green]

Do you have any evidence this crime was committed by members of the traveller community or are you just trotting out a cultural stereotype?

There is very strong circumstancial evidence. There was a traveller encampment on the trackbed - I saw it there when I cycled along Sustrans route 51. Before they arrived the track was in place, after they left lots of sleepers and rails were missing.

 

[moggie]

Do you have any evidence this crime was committed by members of the traveller community or are you just trotting out a cultural stereotype?

They said Gyppos if you read it again. You equated that with the travelling community so who has fallen into the thought police trap now then?. Maybe they should have just said thieves - less confusion.

Of maybe we can just stick to the topic and leave all this pathetic PC nonsense to publications which like to indulge in it.

 

[STEVIEBOY1]

It isnt a case of an easy rebuild, the track will need complete replacement with removal of level crossings, new signalling etc... it has basically been left to rot in the last 20-30 years and is no way fit for a fast passenger service.

Oh, sorry, I did not realise the poor state of the rest of the line, I thought it would be in a better state as the freight trains used it. I stand corrected. it will be good when it is completed though.

 

[MK Tom]

Strictly speaking it's only been out of use for 20 years (the Claydon-Bletchley section). Last train was in 1993. (I believe a one-off HST visit to Winslow?)

Incidentally, rather than start East-West Rail thread number 156,743, I thought I'd just use this thread to ask if anyone knows which level crossings between Oxford and Bedford are or are likely to be converted to bridges and which aren't?

 

[TheKnightWho]

They said Gyppos if you read it again. You equated that with the travelling community so who has fallen into the thought police trap now then?. Maybe they should have just said thieves - less confusion.

Of maybe we can just stick to the topic and leave all this pathetic PC nonsense to publications which like to indulge in it.

Or perhaps you could stop behaving like an petulant teenager about the matter, and acknowledge that needless stereotyping is demeaning and insulting?

If there's pretty good evidence that travellers did actually take the track that's fair enough, but getting uppity when someone says asks about it just smacks of someone who doesn't like having their safe little preconceptions about the world challenged. He quite clearly said "Gyppos", which never refers to anything other than "gypsies" or "travellers". If he'd said a particular derogatory term for black people, for example, would you say that the person calling him out on it was actually the racist one because he's the one that made the connection?

 

[Andyjs247]

Incidentally, rather than start East-West Rail thread number 156,743, I thought I'd just use this thread to ask if anyone knows which level crossings between Oxford and Bedford are or are likely to be converted to bridges and which aren't?

Except for Bicester London Road crossing, all crossings between Oxford and the new Gavray Junction at Bicester are either being closed or replaced by bridges. I can't remember all of the details but in some cases a bridge replaces 2 or more crossings where it is reasonable to do so.

I don't know what the plan is yet east of Bicester on the EWR section as it has not been announced by Network Rail. There are road crossings at Charbridge Lane (i.e. the A4421 Bicester perimeter road), at Launton and on the mothballed section at Steeple Claydon. I guess there are probably many more foot crossings. Charbridge Lane will be the busiest of these by some margin and I would hope it will be replaced by a bridge. I expect it will come down to ££ though.

 

[twoag]

http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/news/local/network-rail-set-to-clear-section-of-track-pre-upgrade-1-5843861

Looks like some work is starting at the other end to.

 

[jimm]

Except for Bicester London Road crossing, all crossings between Oxford and the new Gavray Junction at Bicester are either being closed or replaced by bridges. I can't remember all of the details but in some cases a bridge replaces 2 or more crossings where it is reasonable to do so.

I don't know what the plan is yet east of Bicester on the EWR section as it has not been announced by Network Rail. There are road crossings at Charbridge Lane (i.e. the A4421 Bicester perimeter road), at Launton and on the mothballed section at Steeple Claydon. I guess there are probably many more foot crossings. Charbridge Lane will be the busiest of these by some margin and I would hope it will be replaced by a bridge. I expect it will come down to ££ though.

The London Road crossing is now going to be replaced by a bridge - not surprising given it would have been shut for 40 minutes every hour once both routes are operating. The Government is giving Oxfordshire County Council money to pay for it. I'd expect all those mentioned east of Bicester will also go, given the policy to eliminate as many level crossings as possible.

http://www.bicesteradvertiser.net/n...ncil_gets_money_for_bridge_at_level_crossing/

And further to the story linked to above, East West Rail's news post says they are also going to be working on the section between Bicester and Claydon.

http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/news/vegetation-clearance-work-start-onmothballed-railway-line

 

[Andyjs247]

The London Road crossing is now going to be replaced by a bridge - not surprising given it would have been shut for 40 minutes every hour once both routes are operating. The Government is giving Oxfordshire County Council money to pay for it. I'd expect all those mentioned east of Bicester will also go, given the policy to eliminate as many level crossings as possible.

http://www.bicesteradvertiser.net/n...ncil_gets_money_for_bridge_at_level_crossing/

And further to the story linked to above, East West Rail's news post says they are also going to be working on the section between Bicester and Claydon.

http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/news/vegetation-clearance-work-start-onmothballed-railway-line

Interesting. It's a pity the Government didn't decide earlier that they were going to provide additional funding for a bridge, i.e. at the time Chiltern's TWAO for Evergreen 3 was being considered. By the way, I'd challenge the closed-for-40-minutes-per-hour assertion post EWR. It might be correct if the station wasn't going to be rebuilt with staggered platforms. But staggered platforms will allow a train from Oxford to stop at the station and the crossing remain open to minimise delay. I can't imagine having to wait 5 minutes for each train (there will be 8tph post EWR … unless there are going to be many more trains we don't yet know about?).

Either way it doesn't alter the fact that due to the constrained site, it is going to be difficult (= expensive) to put in a bridge on the current London Road alignment. It will need some fairly extensive earthworks to accommodate ramps at an acceptable gradient on a site constrained by residential properties and a petrol station to the east and a brand new station to the west.

At Bicester Town, vegetation clearance has already begun on the south side in the area which will become a secondary entrance to the station. If you are going to put in a bridge you might have designed the station differently - probably not with staggered platforms and maybe not with a secondary station entrance on the south side (if I remember rightly there will be a turning circle and some parking), possibly just pedestrian access would suffice.

IMHO a bridge would be desirable, but not practicable on the current London Road alignment. And ideally you would want a new bridge complete by the time the new station opens and train services resume in 2015. Just can't see it happening - unless you close the road and railway asap. I guess the road has to remain open but also bear in mind that rail access to the MOD over the crossing has to remain for the most part after the rest of the route to Oxford is closed, one of the reasons building of the Bicester chord is already well under way.

Maybe it needs a completely new road - which probably has to go over the new station (and needing bigger/longer ramps etc) though I can't visualise where I'd put that road, not without demolishing buildings.

 

[jimm]

Interesting. It's a pity the Government didn't decide earlier that they were going to provide additional funding for a bridge, i.e. at the time Chiltern's TWAO for Evergreen 3 was being considered. By the way, I'd challenge the closed-for-40-minutes-per-hour assertion post EWR. It might be correct if the station wasn't going to be rebuilt with staggered platforms. But staggered platforms will allow a train from Oxford to stop at the station and the crossing remain open to minimise delay. I can't imagine having to wait 5 minutes for each train (there will be 8tph post EWR … unless there are going to be many more trains we don't yet know about?).

Either way it doesn't alter the fact that due to the constrained site, it is going to be difficult (= expensive) to put in a bridge on the current London Road alignment. It will need some fairly extensive earthworks to accommodate ramps at an acceptable gradient on a site constrained by residential properties and a petrol station to the east and a brand new station to the west.

At Bicester Town, vegetation clearance has already begun on the south side in the area which will become a secondary entrance to the station. If you are going to put in a bridge you might have designed the station differently - probably not with staggered platforms and maybe not with a secondary station entrance on the south side (if I remember rightly there will be a turning circle and some parking), possibly just pedestrian access would suffice.

IMHO a bridge would be desirable, but not practicable on the current London Road alignment. And ideally you would want a new bridge complete by the time the new station opens and train services resume in 2015. Just can't see it happening - unless you close the road and railway asap. I guess the road has to remain open but also bear in mind that rail access to the MOD over the crossing has to remain for the most part after the rest of the route to Oxford is closed, one of the reasons building of the Bicester chord is already well under way.

Maybe it needs a completely new road - which probably has to go over the new station (and needing bigger/longer ramps etc) though I can't visualise where I'd put that road, not without demolishing buildings.

Evergreen is a private project, so why would the government have been funding anything to do with it? And the Chiltern service on its own would not keep the barriers down for such an extended period each hour. While Chiltern and East West services may account for 8tph, there's likely to be at least one long-distance XC-type service each way, plus at least one freight path per hour each way as well, which will all eat up time, hence the bridge.

I don't think anyone is under any illusions about the constraints of the site but there's nothing to say you can't compulsorily purchase land and buildings to create extra space, same as has happened to the industrial units north of the station site to allow for the new station building and parking.

 

[HowardGWR]

See the 'Chiltern Oxford Link Approved' thread where @SWT_passenger made a link to a pdf that gives all the options for a Bicester London Rd bridge. Warning, it is 99mb.

 

[al green]

The London Road crossing is now going to be replaced by a bridge - not surprising given it would have been shut for 40 minutes every hour once both routes are operating. The Government is giving Oxfordshire County Council money to pay for it. I'd expect all those mentioned east of Bicester will also go, given the policy to eliminate as many level crossings as possible.

If Oxfordshire CPRE don't like a bridge at Bicester I dread to think how they would react to this story:

"HS2 is set to travel through several major British towns, such as Oxford"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...S2-carve-Britains-historic-canal-network.html

The Daily Hate keeps to its usual high standards of accuracy.

 

[mister-sparky]

If Oxfordshire CPRE don't like a bridge at Bicester I dread to think how they would react to this story:

"HS2 is set to travel through several major British towns, such as Oxford"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...S2-carve-Britains-historic-canal-network.html

The Daily Hate keeps to its usual high standards of accuracy.

I love the Daily Fail. HS2 isn't going anywhere near Oxford, let alone through it.

 

[swt_passenger]

I love the Daily Fail. HS2 isn't going anywhere near Oxford, let alone through it.

Some idiot writing about HS2 obliterating the canals has obviously assumed that the Oxford Canal crossing is actually in Oxford, rather than as shown on their map... :roll:

 

[STANDISH]

For those to wanting to travel on the eastern end of this line over flyover and down to Swanbourne sidings see Pathfinders rail tours trip on 29/3/2014. Unfortunately the timings suggest some part of the journey might be in the dark.

 

[RPM]

Some idiot writing about HS2 obliterating the canals has obviously assumed that the Oxford Canal crossing is actually in Oxford, rather than as shown on their map... :roll:

To be fair, HS2 Ltd have made one or two blunders regarding canal routes (existing or awaiting restoration). Not a big issue though, the Canal & River Trust are on the case and take a pragmatic position, neither for nor against HS2, just protecting their interests. Take note Bucks County Council et al

 

[swt_passenger]

I'd expect HS2 will add a very small number of rail bridges (in single figures?) to the existing canal network - they'll hardly be noticeable in amongst all the other existing rail and road bridges. As you say taking a pragmatic approach is all that is needed, as seen with the canal aqueduct that goes nowhere on the M6 (Toll) that allows for a future canal restoration.

 

[67018]

I'd expect HS2 will add a very small number of rail bridges (in single figures?) to the existing canal network - they'll hardly be noticeable in amongst all the other existing rail and road bridges. As you say taking a pragmatic approach is all that is needed, as seen with the canal aqueduct that goes nowhere on the M6 (Toll) that allows for a future canal restoration.

I agree with your point, but hope that the M6 Toll aqueduct is not used as a model - the canal restoration trust had to raise their own funds to pay for the whole thing, or face any realistic prospect of restoration being scuppered.

Not a good way of dealing with local opposition, and I'd hope HS2 would avoid such political own goals.