East West Rail Mainline Interchanges

[William3000]

One of the states benefits of East West Rail are the interchanges where it crosses many of the north/south routes.

In doing so from west to east it crosses the Oxford (not sure it’s official name) Mainline, Chiltern Mainline, HS2, West Coast Mainline, Midland Mainline, East Coast Mainline, and West Anglia Main Line. Interchange opportunities at the stations varies in terms of existing service patterns so I’m interested to gauge people’s opinions about if any additional trains will stop to connect with east west rail.

Oxford Mainline at Oxford excellent connectivity as everything stops there

Chiltern Mainline - Bicester North is some distance from Bicester Village (approx 20 min walk so is unlikely to provide much of a benefit). Bicester Village does provide connections to London Marylebone, but without moving the stations there is limited potential for links northwards.

HS2 - no proposed station so no opportunities here and indication is that the time penalties of stopping some HS2 services will be economically unviable.

West Coast Mainline - Bletchley and MK Central. The issue here is that many long distance intercity trains stop at MK Central but not at Bletchley. While some services on EWR from Oxford will continue to MK Central, those from the east won’t and appear unlikely to do so. So for people coming into Bletchley from the east, people may need a further change at MK Central for most of the long distance services north. That said Bletchley will provide some decent connectivity to places like Northampton, Birmingham Airport, Hemel Hempstead etc. it seems unlikely that long distance trains would ever stop at Bletchley it being so close to MK Central. The alternative would be for Bletchley to displace MK Central as the intercity hub but that seems unlikely too.

Midland Mainline at Bedford - it looks like a major upgrade at Bedford and I think the huge expense of going through Bedford justifies some more long distance services stopping there.

East Coast Mainline at St Neots South/Tempsford - this is a new station and it seems likely that all Thameslink trains between Peterborough and Horsham would stop there, as well as some Great Northern peaks in the morning and evening. However, it seems very unlikely that LNER services will call there given the relative proximity of Stevenage and Peterborough. There are a number of open access operators like Lumo, Hull Trains, Grand Central most of which don’t stop until as far north as Doncaster and I guess there is a possibility they may wish to capture a bit of the market but still seems unlikely.

West Anglia Mainline at Cambridge and Cambridge South - connectivity at Cambridge will be excellent as everything stops here and I would expect many (though perhaps not all) EWR services to call at Cambridge South where I suspect most Greater Anglia and Thameslink trains will call but not Cross Country or most fast Great Northern King’s Lynn to London King’s Cross.

One of the problems with the original Varsity line was the relatively poor connectivity where it crossed the mainlines - the current proposal looks better but there are still unfortunately limits about what May be achieved.

 

[The Planner]

Not convinced Bicester is an issue as the numbers wanting to go north to Banbury from the East are going to be very small. Leamington could arguably be quicker and more frequent by changing at Bletchley. Doesn't Bicester Village to North have a shuttle bus anyway? Nothing to say that a token fast service provision post HS2 couldn't stop at Bletchley on the WCML.

 

[Brubulus]

One of the states benefits of East West Rail are the interchanges where it crosses many of the north/south routes.

In doing so from west to east it crosses the Oxford (not sure it’s official name) Mainline, Chiltern Mainline, HS2, West Coast Mainline, Midland Mainline, East Coast Mainline, and West Anglia Main Line. Interchange opportunities at the stations varies in terms of existing service patterns so I’m interested to gauge people’s opinions about if any additional trains will stop to connect with east west rail.

Oxford Mainline at Oxford excellent connectivity as everything stops there

Chiltern Mainline - Bicester North is some distance from Bicester Village (approx 20 min walk so is unlikely to provide much of a benefit). Bicester Village does provide connections to London Marylebone, but without moving the stations there is limited potential for links northwards.

HS2 - no proposed station so no opportunities here and indication is that the time penalties of stopping some HS2 services will be economically unviable.

West Coast Mainline - Bletchley and MK Central. The issue here is that many long distance intercity trains stop at MK Central but not at Bletchley. While some services on EWR from Oxford will continue to MK Central, those from the east won’t and appear unlikely to do so. So for people coming into Bletchley from the east, people may need a further change at MK Central for most of the long distance services north. That said Bletchley will provide some decent connectivity to places like Northampton, Birmingham Airport, Hemel Hempstead etc. it seems unlikely that long distance trains would ever stop at Bletchley it being so close to MK Central. The alternative would be for Bletchley to displace MK Central as the intercity hub but that seems unlikely too.

Midland Mainline at Bedford - it looks like a major upgrade at Bedford and I think the huge expense of going through Bedford justifies some more long distance services stopping there.

East Coast Mainline at St Neots South/Tempsford - this is a new station and it seems likely that all Thameslink trains between Peterborough and Horsham would stop there, as well as some Great Northern peaks in the morning and evening. However, it seems very unlikely that LNER services will call there given the relative proximity of Stevenage and Peterborough. There are a number of open access operators like Lumo, Hull Trains, Grand Central most of which don’t stop until as far north as Doncaster and I guess there is a possibility they may wish to capture a bit of the market but still seems unlikely.

West Anglia Mainline at Cambridge and Cambridge South - connectivity at Cambridge will be excellent as everything stops here and I would expect many (though perhaps not all) EWR services to call at Cambridge South where I suspect most Greater Anglia and Thameslink trains will call but not Cross Country or most fast Great Northern King’s Lynn to London King’s Cross.

One of the problems with the original Varsity line was the relatively poor connectivity where it crossed the mainlines - the current proposal looks better but there are still unfortunately limits about what May be achieved.

A service could easily run from the east to MKC, though it would have to reverse at Bletchley but it would have the potential to greatly improve service from the east to the north including (if good connections are provided) a reduction in Cambridge-Birmingham journey times in excess of 30 mins.

 

[zwk500]

The thing about EWR is it doesn't need to connect to the intercity routes because anybody looking to travel further north than Peterborough, Rugby or Birmingham will use the more direct rail routes (or go in and out of London). Therefore the connectivity at Oxford, Bletchley/MK, Bedford, St Neots/Templesford and Cambridge is fine. In an ideal world yes all trains would call at MKC but we're left with what we have.

E.g. Oxford-York you'd use XC, Cambridge to Manchester you'd travel via HS2 or with EMR if you're price conscious.

 

[William3000]

The thing about EWR is it doesn't need to connect to the intercity routes because anybody looking to travel further north than Peterborough, Rugby or Birmingham will use the more direct rail routes (or go in and out of London). Therefore the connectivity at Oxford, Bletchley/MK, Bedford, St Neots/Templesford and Cambridge is fine. In an ideal world yes all trains would call at MKC but we're left with what we have.

E.g. Oxford-York you'd use XC, Cambridge to Manchester you'd travel via HS2 or with EMR if you're price conscious.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Jan 2023 ==

I regularly travel Cambridge to Manchester and 90% of the time go: Cambridge to Peterborough; Peterborough to Leeds/York; Leeds/York to Manchester Victoria.

With EWR: I might consider Cambridge to Bletchley; Bletchley to MKC; MKC to Manchester Piccadilly.

Equally if I’m travelling to Sheffield, which I often do, I tend to drive to Kettering but with EWR, would probably go via Bedford depending on connections.

 

[adamedwards]

Given the Cambridge to Birmingham journey time saving quoted by Brubulus (which is impressive and I'd not appreciated before) would an east to north chord at Bletchley be viable, given it could also be used by other services to head north? It would need more than a train every 30 mins to justify the cost of demolishing various industrial units and crossing Bletchley depot sidings.

I'm not expecting this to happen until East West rail gets built beyond Bedford, so by then HS2 will have freed up capacity on the WCML for other services. I can remember it being suggested years ago that XC might want to run Manchester - Milton Keynes - Oxford as faster than via Birmingham.

In both cases bi-mode trains are essential unless EW rail actually gets wired.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would personally still like to see a Denbigh Chord to allow running direct to MKC from the Cambridge side and all services calling and reversing at MKC. Otherwise you are talking a double reverse, though if crewed from Bletchley and doing crew changes there this may not be disastrous as the new crews can be waiting in the right place.

 

[Nottingham59]

In the post HS2 world, I can see many more trains on the fast lines calling Bletchley. And I assume all will call at MKC.

 

[swt_passenger]

Hasn’t this been done a few times before, and there‘s little or no evidence for a station where the route crosses the ECML?

I suspect there are also a reasonable number of existing threads where the missing Denbigh Hall chord is proposed. I doubt another discussion will make it any more likely.

 

[richieb1971]

But why Aylesbury and not Oxford ? And why nothing from the east ? Seems a bit "minimalist" given that MKC was purported to be the selling point of EWR

EWR has 1 major flaw in it in my humble opinion and its based on pre existing track. There is no east-north curve anywhere on it. There has been a trackbed laid for 60 years going from Oxford to MKC and its still there, hence why they are using it. Unless a chord is made at Bletchley which joins the east to the north so MKC can be connected on a single service its never going to happen. It is possible with procurement of land which is currently utilized by an industrial estate with a huge warehouse in the way, but that needs to done before any East-North chord can be built in order to facilitate a Cambridge-MKC service direct.

 

[Wyrleybart]

EWR has 1 major flaw in it in my humble opinion and its based on pre existing track. There is no east-north curve anywhere on it. There has been a trackbed laid for 60 years going from Oxford to MKC and its still there, hence why they are using it. Unless a chord is made at Bletchley which joins the east to the north so MKC can be connected on a single service its never going to happen. It is possible with procurement of land which is currently utilized by an industrial estate with a huge warehouse in the way, but that needs to done before any East-North chord can be built in order to facilitate a Cambridge-MKC service direct.

I do agree, but ......... a swift change ends in Bletchley station would probably only cost 5 or 6 minutes if it was slick. Is it signalled to be able to change ends on the new high level platforms and run down onto the WCML ?

 

[zwk500]

But why Aylesbury and not Oxford ? And why nothing from the east ? Seems a bit "minimalist" given that MKC was purported to be the selling point of EWR

Because MK-Oxford is happening anyway and Aylesbury-MK is the dominant flow. But this is meant to be the non-speculation thread.

I do agree, but ......... a swift change ends in Bletchley station would probably only cost 5 or 6 minutes if it was slick. Is it signalled to be able to change ends on the new high level platforms and run down onto the WCML ?

The high level platforms appear to be reversible, although it's not clear if the links to Bedford would be. However you can also reverse in P5.

 

[mwmbwls]

EWR has 1 major flaw in it in my humble opinion and its based on pre existing track. There is no east-north curve anywhere on it. There has been a trackbed laid for 60 years going from Oxford to MKC and its still there, hence why they are using it. Unless a chord is made at Bletchley which joins the east to the north so MKC can be connected on a single service its never going to happen. It is possible with procurement of land which is currently utilized by an industrial estate with a huge warehouse in the way, but that needs to done before any East-North chord can be built in order to facilitate a Cambridge-MKC service direct.

East-West Rail - Bletchley

The Government announced its backing of Phase 1 of the development of a revised East-West Rail Link in August 2000. Phase 1 – Bicester to Oxford (Completed December 2016) Chiltern Railways’ Evergreen 3 project involved the introduction of new direct services between London (Marylebone) and...

flic.kr

This Network Rail image illustrates your point.

 

[12LDA28C]

I do agree, but ......... a swift change ends in Bletchley station would probably only cost 5 or 6 minutes if it was slick. Is it signalled to be able to change ends on the new high level platforms and run down onto the WCML ?

That would require bi-di signalling on the flyover and as no signals are yet in place, that remains to be seen. I very much doubt services will be planned to run Cambridge - Bletchley - MKC - Bletchley - Oxford.

 

[The Planner]

I do agree, but ......... a swift change ends in Bletchley station would probably only cost 5 or 6 minutes if it was slick. Is it signalled to be able to change ends on the new high level platforms and run down onto the WCML ?

Because MK-Oxford is happening anyway and Aylesbury-MK is the dominant flow. But this is meant to be the non-speculation thread.

The high level platforms appear to be reversible, although it's not clear if the links to Bedford would be. However you can also reverse in P5.

That would require bi-di signalling on the flyover and as no signals are yet in place, that remains to be seen. I very much doubt services will be planned to run Cambridge - Bletchley - MKC - Bletchley - Oxford.

Cannot be done on the high level platforms. Its only reversible towards Oxford.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Cannot be done on the high level platforms. Its only reversible towards Oxford.

If you did do it you'd just do it in P6 rather than blocking the flyover platforms. Which lacks a lift, but fitting one would hardly be that difficult.

It flummoxes me how it was never done; Bedford-Bletchley would be far less of a basket case with a through service to MKC where people actually want to go, and you could make use of it by building eco-villages around the stations.

 

[zwk500]

If you did do it you'd just do it in P6 rather than blocking the flyover platforms. Which lacks a lift, but fitting one would hardly be that difficult.

The bigger problem is that P6 lacks a crossover to access the Reliefs towards MKC. P5 is the only available platform to reverse.

It flummoxes me how it was never done; Bedford-Bletchley would be far less of a basket case with a through service to MKC where people actually want to go, and you could make use of it by building eco-villages around the stations.

Wasn't P2A put in for exactly this? Maybe the paths couldn't get back to Bletchley before the departure or something like that. I can't imagine it was a particularly good path from Bletchley to MK as the reliefs are slow.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The bigger problem is that P6 lacks a crossover to access the Reliefs towards MKC. P5 is the only available platform to reverse.

Ah, and that gets in the way of other things.

Wasn't P2A put in for exactly this?

That was certainly said at the time.

Maybe the paths couldn't get back to Bletchley before the departure or something like that. I can't imagine it was a particularly good path from Bletchley to MK as the reliefs are slow.

I think it would need a third unit, yes. (A north-east curve wouldn't; it's also possible that the speed-up from the "5 stations" proposal would also remove the need for a third unit but I'd need to work it out).

 

[The Planner]

The bigger problem is that P6 lacks a crossover to access the Reliefs towards MKC. P5 is the only available platform to reverse.

Wasn't P2A put in for exactly this? Maybe the paths couldn't get back to Bletchley before the departure or something like that. I can't imagine it was a particularly good path from Bletchley to MK as the reliefs are slow.

Depends who you speak to, its certainly been called the Oxford or the Reading bay in the past.

 

[mr_jrt]

The old western Oxford platforms still partly survive (abet now trackless) at the northern end of the station - they used to be used for parcels and tucking units out of the way, if I recall correctly. Swear I saw a photo of some units sitting in them when they still had track. Suspect they went away as crossing the fast lines probably got too difficult as traffic increased.

Ah, here we go:

Bletchley old platform next to 1?

Hi guys, just stumbled across the disused platform at Bletchley, it would of been assessable from both sides of the train it appears. What was last to use this, and when did it shut/ why? Thanks

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Bletchleyite]

The old western Oxford platforms still partly survive (abet now trackless) at the northern end of the station - they used to be used for parcels and tucking units out of the way, if I recall correctly. Swear I saw a photo of some units sitting in them when they still had track. Suspect they went away as crossing the fast lines probably got too difficult as traffic increased.

Ah, here we go:

Bletchley old platform next to 1?

Hi guys, just stumbled across the disused platform at Bletchley, it would of been assessable from both sides of the train it appears. What was last to use this, and when did it shut/ why? Thanks

www.railforums.co.uk

Did they used to continue south through what is now the station building? If not, they are rather pointing the wrong way for Oxford, and would even be a very tight turnout to get to the Marston Vale.

 

[richieb1971]

Did they used to continue south through what is now the station building? If not, they are rather pointing the wrong way for Oxford, and would even be a very tight turnout to get to the Marston Vale.

As shown in the 70s a bay platform existed for Oxford terminators.

Immediately north of the flyover was an extreme S junction between fast and slow lines which was removed in the past decade or so. Used for through trains. The bay platform was used to park network rail vehicles last I saw, next to a 70s looking signalling box looking thing made out of concrete.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As shown in the 70s a bay platform existed for Oxford terminators.

Ah, so not any part of the currently extant (but unused for passengers and fenced off) bay which faces north.

The old south facing western bay appears from Google Maps to have the traincrew depot plonked on it, the trackbed approaching it appears to be used for vehicle parking and storage.

Immediately north of the flyover was an extreme S junction between fast and slow lines which was removed in the past decade or so. Used for through trains. The bay platform was used to park network rail vehicles last I saw, next to a 70s looking signalling box looking thing made out of concrete.

So that would have allowed the north-facing bay to be used for Bedford/Cambridge? Was it, or did they just use P5?

 

[richieb1971]

Ah, so not any part of the currently extant (but unused for passengers and fenced off) bay which faces north.

The old south facing western bay appears from Google Maps to have the traincrew depot plonked on it, the trackbed approaching it appears to be used for vehicle parking and storage.



So that would have allowed the north-facing bay to be used for Bedford/Cambridge? Was it, or did they just use P5?

Don't know. But as I said the through trains used multiple point sets on the level to get to the east side of the station. The siding north of the station appears to be relic left from a steam shed in the 1930s which was where the car park is now. Bedford goes left of pic, Oxford goes right.

 

[70014IronDuke]

So that would have allowed the north-facing bay to be used for Bedford/Cambridge? Was it, or did they just use P5?

As I remember, the Bedford/Cambridge trains usualy used one of the western through platforms, not a bay, to terminate. But it was a long time ago!

 

[al green]

The fact that MKC is "off route" for the direct EWR Cambridge-Oxford line make it a little geographically ockard. Perhaps through passengers could alight at Bletchley for tea and a cake before resuming their journey ?

Sadly the tea room that used to be on platforms 2/3 was demolished about 30 years ago. A brick building with curved glazed ends IIRC.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Mar 2023 ==

That would require bi-di signalling on the flyover and as no signals are yet in place, that remains to be seen. I very much doubt services will be planned to run Cambridge - Bletchley - MKC - Bletchley - Oxford.

I passed through Bletchley on a bus this week and noticed that the signals have gone up at the north end of the high level platforms. They are bagged so the detail is not clear. But from the shape it looked as though P7 has a feather, which makes sense because it is immediately before Summit of Flyover Jn (or whatever its called now). The one on P8 looks like a single aspect so is probably a fixed red.

So it seems unlikely that services will be able to reverse in the high level platforms. I recall proposing at the PI that they should be able to do so. NR said it would cost a few pence extra and so would not be included, on government instruction to get cost to an absolute minimum, even if that meant removing useful functionality.

 

[al green]

The bigger problem is that P6 lacks a crossover to access the Reliefs towards MKC. P5 is the only available platform to reverse.

Wasn't P2A put in for exactly this? Maybe the paths couldn't get back to Bletchley before the departure or something like that. I can't imagine it was a particularly good path from Bletchley to MK as the reliefs are slow.

It was a franchise commitment for LM to extend the Marston Vale service to MKC. That could only happen once Bletchley resignalling was completed and Bletchley relief 2 was created from one of the old goods loops. When that did eventually happen LM said it was too close to the end of their franchise for them to introduce the new service extension. It wasn't included in the LNR franchise so it never happened despite all those promises.

 

[zwk500]

I passed through Bletchley on a bus this week and noticed that the signals have gone up at the north end of the high level platforms. They are bagged so the detail is not clear. But from the shape it looked as though P7 has a feather, which makes sense because it is immediately before Summit of Flyover Jn (or whatever its called now). The one on P8 looks like a single aspect so is probably a fixed red.

So it seems unlikely that services will be able to reverse in the high level platforms. I recall proposing at the PI that they should be able to do so. NR said it would cost a few pence extra and so would not be included, on government instruction to get cost to an absolute minimum, even if that meant removing useful functionality.

I think it was confirmed a few posts back that the high level platforms would permit trains from Oxford only to reverse. Trains from Bedford or MK would not be able to reverse in the platforms and require a shunt via the Oxford end. (See https://signalmaps.co.uk/#bletchley:1697)

 

[12LDA28C]

I passed through Bletchley on a bus this week and noticed that the signals have gone up at the north end of the high level platforms. They are bagged so the detail is not clear. But from the shape it looked as though P7 has a feather, which makes sense because it is immediately before Summit of Flyover Jn (or whatever its called now). The one on P8 looks like a single aspect so is probably a fixed red.

So it seems unlikely that services will be able to reverse in the high level platforms. I recall proposing at the PI that they should be able to do so. NR said it would cost a few pence extra and so would not be included, on government instruction to get cost to an absolute minimum, even if that meant removing useful functionality.

I would have thought that if there are signals at the north end of both platforms, that indicates that trains from Oxford will indeed be able to reverse - the track layout appears to feature a crossover before the platforms so that eastbound trains can terminate in Platform 8 and return west. That would explain your assumption that the signal at the north end of P8 is a fixed red, although don't forget that 3-aspect signalling can use a single LED lens.

 

[zwk500]

I would have thought that if there are signals at the north end of both platforms, that indicates that trains from Oxford will indeed be able to reverse - does the track layout feature a crossover before the platforms so that eastbound trains can terminate in Platform 8 and return west? That would explain your assumption that the signal at the north end of P8 is a fixed red, although don't forget that 3-aspect signalling can use a single LED lens.

Look at the post above - there are facing and trailing crossovers west of Bletchley HL. Trains from Oxford can return west directly reversing in either platform. Trains from Bedford would need to shunt via the west end to return east. Trains from MKC to P7 would also need to shunt. It's not immediately clear whether a train from MKC would be able to use the Down Flyover wrong-road into 8 for a reversal, although I suspect it Cannot, because the value of such a move would be minimal compared to the cost of implementing it in the signalling.