Ipswich Bacon chord

[GB]

I believe the plan is to electrify the chord. Not sure what the current plans are for electrifcation on the whole branch.

 

[edwin_m]

The picture in September's Modern Railways shows the junction with the main line, spanned by portals but with OLE supports only on the main line. I've not heard of any plan to electrify the chord, but the portals would probably be as they are whether it was or not.

 

[Prairie_5542]

I heard a rumour too that they were going to electrify the chord and line to FLX.

 

[DXMachina]

The whole rationale for the scheme is to avoid the present reversals.

So the bacon chord undoes the hamstrings in the track layout....

 

[Prairie_5542]

So the bacon chord undoes the hamstrings in the track layout....

What do u mean?

 

[DXMachina]

Pun. Play on words

Bacon c(h)ord / ham-string

The latter also being a highly restrictive issue, referring to the hamstring tendon on the back of the ankle which if damaged, seriously affects mobility.

 

[Prairie_5542]

Pun. Play on words

Bacon c(h)ord / ham-string

The latter also being a highly restrictive issue, referring to the hamstring tendon on the back of the ankle which if damaged, seriously affects mobility.

ha ha!

 

[455driver]

slightly off topic, but in the works of Homer:

Mmmmm Bacon

Am I the only one that sees the irony in someone with a username of "The Ham" going on about bacon?

 

[Prairie_5542]

Am I the only one that sees the irony in someone with a username of "The Ham" going on about bacon?

Ha ha lol

 

[D365]

Am I the only one that sees the irony in someone with a username of "The Ham" going on about bacon?

Jinx (or do I mean "oink") - said that long ago :P

Hear on another thread that the line is named after a former bacon factory - I want to know who came up with the name "Bacon Chord" so I can praise them on behalf of our community xD (Sorry, I'm being silly, it will actually prove to be a useful part of the railway!)

Btw, welcome back 455driver, we genuinely missed you!

 

[edwin_m]

The Bacon Factory Chord was a sensible decision. Any of the alternatives would have been much rasher, and a pig to build.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

The concept came from the high level planning discussions with operators and NR - and thanks to the DfT freight scheme funding - the bacon reference comes from the old Harris Bacon Factory near to the site (some land of which was acquired) - the 2 junctions leading to it are "Europa" and "Boss Hall" - naming new junctions is a rare thing in the UK , and I must say I do like "Europa" which has the ring of "Continental Junction" in Kent.

You can be sure that the chord is laid out for 25kV - I would estimate CP6 for this - though someone at ATOC asked for it in CP5 as a low cost scheme to evaluate more branch line wiring , bit like the Windermere scheme just approved.

 

[Tobbes]

You can be sure that the chord is laid out for 25kV - I would estimate CP6 for this - though someone at ATOC asked for it in CP5 as a low cost scheme to evaluate more branch line wiring , bit like the Windermere scheme just approved.

CP, most interesting. Assume this means ATOC were just talking about electrifying FLX branch, and not the East Suffolk throughout? And are they planning as a part of the FLX upgrade work to replace the awful single-lead junction at Westerfield as well as selective doubling down the branch?

Thanks,

Tobbes

 

[STANDISH]

The Modern Railways article indicates that the current fuelling point could be moved into sidings near East Suffolk Junction.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

CP, most interesting. Assume this means ATOC were just talking about electrifying FLX branch, and not the East Suffolk throughout? And are they planning as a part of the FLX upgrade work to replace the awful single-lead junction at Westerfield as well as selective doubling down the branch?

Thanks,

Tobbes

The idea of electrifying the branch (apart from abolishing yet another awkward isolated DMU / 153 service) , was to allow significant improvements to overall route capacity by reducing loco changes at Ipswich Yard for Freight trains heading to London. With 30 freights a day in the plan + an hourly passenger service , capacity is getting very tight. Removing the Ipswich loco changes would create more capacity and improve freight running times (saving train crew costs also) - on the main line , as well as the branch. This was pointed out in the responses to the 2009 Electrification RUS and other documents.

The branch has some options for further redoubling - partly tied to Section 106 agreements for the Port expansion (not yet implemented) - the impossible bit on the branch is the single track Spring Road Viaduct - but quite easily done from the Derby Road area to Trimley via Levington (in fact the LNER had a pre WW2 scheme to do this for the buoyant holiday traffic of that era when Felixstowe was a very quiet local port !)

Don't think the Westerfield Junction is a major issue - though there was much more debate on Haughley Junction on the main line. (which is now authorised I believe)

No chance of doing the East Suffoolk I regret - 49 miles of a rural line with a 2 car service and no freight (plus the workings are linked in with other Norwich based services for economy and efficiency). Haughley to Ely and beyond would have much higher priority to give an all electric freight link to the ECML and beyond - and major passenger benefits on the back of it ! East Anglia has seen some good , steady investment in the last 10 years. More to come am sure.

 

[Tobbes]

CP,

Many thanks for that.

No, I was kidding about the East Suffolk (though obviously it would be great to restore dualling throughout, and the high-speed connection to Yarmouth though Haddiscoe....! I digress.).

On dualling FLX, is the Spring Road viaduct not wide enough, or is it the risk of two frieghtliners on it at once that is the limitation? And when do you expect the s106 dualling to take place?

On electrification, having lived relatively close to Derby Road a few years ago, getting rid of the diesel noise through the night would doubtless be very welcome to the local residents. Good news about Haugley Junc, too - and electrification to Ely / Nuneaton would be very helpful.

Tobbes

 

[Sir_Clagalot]

erm the Felixstowe passenger service isnt "an awkward isolated DMU / 153" line, what about the East Suffolk line, and the Cambridge/Peterborough services that are allso DMU... it's not isolated!! Wiring the Felixstowe branch and then running an EMU would create an isolated EMU operation.

 

[lancastrian]

Just an 'off the wall' thought. Perhaps when the Bacon Curve is officially opened, they could ask Peppa Pig to do the honours?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

erm the Felixstowe passenger service isnt "an awkward isolated DMU / 153" line, what about the East Suffolk line, and the Cambridge/Peterborough services that are allso DMU... it's not isolated!! Wiring the Felixstowe branch and then running an EMU would create an isolated EMU operation.

Not if it was linked into say an Ipswich - xxx (non London service) ...I may have inadvertently thought of Marks Tey - Sudbury which is awkward, 'Pologies.

Remember - tongue in cheek - Felixstowe Port suggesting to bus the train service - glorious 1 car that it is and well used - to give more paths (erm ...who is on the block for spending money via a section 106..?) - write an essay please on privately financed infrastructure versus public financed infrastructucture - credit for actual examples ..


a

 

[D365]

Just an 'off the wall' thought. Perhaps when the Bacon Curve is officially opened, they could ask Peppa Pig to do the honours?

And her little brother George. I think the porcine humour could belong in the old 'Railway Memes' thread
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Remember - tongue in cheek - Felixstowe Port suggesting to bus the train service - glorious 1 car that it is and well used - to give more paths (erm ...who is on the block for spending money via a section 106..?) - write an essay please on privately financed infrastructure versus public financed infrastructucture - credit for actual examples ..

Sounds fun... :/

 

[Tobbes]

Not if it was linked into say an Ipswich - xxx (non London service) ...I may have inadvertently thought of Marks Tey - Sudbury which is awkward, 'Pologies.

It would be a sensible extension of the semi-fasts that terminate in Ipswich - indeed, IIRC, the 312s were actually fitted with FLX destination blinds from new.

Tobbes

 

[ChiefPlanner]

It would be a sensible extension of the semi-fasts that terminate in Ipswich - indeed, IIRC, the 312s were actually fitted with FLX destination blinds from new.

Tobbes

Didn't know that ..but that is the sort of idea - you can see an all electric passenger Ipswich developing.

You may have gathered I have "previous" , - both on the ground at Ipswich - and at a somewhat more strategic level. (and indeed - used to moniter traffic way back at Spring Road viaduct as lived very close to it and could hear the 2 x37 on the 2200 and 2230 off Felixstowe a good way off ....)

 

[HowardGWR]

Didn't know that ..but that is the sort of idea - you can see an all electric passenger Ipswich developing.

You may have gathered I have "previous" , - both on the ground at Ipswich - and at a somewhat more strategic level. (and indeed - used to moniter traffic way back at Spring Road viaduct as lived very close to it and could hear the 2 x37 on the 2200 and 2230 off Felixstowe a good way off ....)

Was thought ever given to the Felixstowe rail traffic crossing the river Orwell south of Ipswich and going that way? I mean, that's what the competing A14 does, so why could the rail not have been built alongside it?

Apologies if all this has been discussed previously, - it's 'new to me'.

 

[Tobbes]

Was thought ever given to the Felixstowe rail traffic crossing the river Orwell south of Ipswich and going that way? I mean, that's what the competing A14 does, so why could the rail not have been built alongside it?

Apologies if all this has been discussed previously, - it's 'new to me'.

I don't know, but I can't imagine that it ever was. The A14 bridge is high enough to clear ships into Ipswich itself, and as a result is quite steep even for a road on both sides. If you were to follow the A14 alignment, you'd also have a tight climbing turn to the GEML as it heads up Belstead Bank, which wouldn't be great.

More importantly, the key is to getting container traffic not bound for London away from London - which is why Bacon Chord is so useful. Of all of the ways to get from Felixstowe to the WCML, I can't think of one that causes more congestion to other users that GEML - NLL - WCML: unless you're looking to run your containers over three of the most congested lines in Britain, of course!

Tobbes

 

[jopsuk]

More importantly, the key is to getting container traffic not bound for London away from London - which is why Bacon Chord is so useful. Of all of the ways to get from Felixstowe to the WCML, I can't think of one that causes more congestion to other users that GEML - NLL - WCML: unless you're looking to run your containers over three of the most congested lines in Britain, of course!

Tobbes

Yes, but the idea isn't to get freight off the NLL/southern WCML, it's to open up those paths to freight from the Thames Gateway port.

A shame, as a (other than engineering) freight-only NLL is starting to look like a good idea- never mind my crazy suggestion for linking the ELL to the Watford DC (the alignment could take four tracks the whole way, it would operate entirely seperately to the NLL)

 

[Corporal Jones]

The picture in September's Modern Railways shows the junction with the main line, spanned by portals but with OLE supports only on the main line. I've not heard of any plan to electrify the chord, but the portals would probably be as they are whether it was or not.

.

The Infrastructure Planning Portal, linked to in an earlier post, section 1.3.4. refers to part of the chord at its junction with the Great Eastern Mainline being electrified in case an electric train accidentally diverts on to the chord. Presumably this is to give it time to stop without damaging its pantograph, running out of overhead or damaging the mainline overhead.

Presumably it would also allow for any future extension of the overhead to Felixstowe to be carried out without disrupting the mainline.

 

[Tobbes]

Yes, but the idea isn't to get freight off the NLL/southern WCML, it's to open up those paths to freight from the Thames Gateway port.

Ah, very interesting. I'm a bit surprised that they've not considered an E-N curve at Stanford-le-Hope, a new formation over the A13 east of Basildon to connect with the line to the east of Wickford, and then an E-N curve west of Billericay to GEML. (This is only modestly tongue in cheek- the c2c lines that far out can't be that busy, and then up GEML - using the paths released by the Bacon Factory curve - would ensure that Thames Gateway traffic didn't snarl up LO / GOBLIN / NLL.)

I can't conceive how the existing NLL could be 4 tracked? Apologies if I've misunderstood.

Tobbes

 

[CockneySparrow]

Seem to remember that it was costed at £33m for single or £47m for double track. The sensible decision at the time was taken to install double as there was an approx £30m cost to alter at a later date. I just hope London Gateway doesnt spoil this investment as several shippers seem keen on moving unless thats just a ploy for Hutchinsons to lower their fees. The doubling of the branch from Derby Rd to Trimley has already had its planning permission extended a few years rather than get it done asap.

Probably by then passenger services will be finished along the route if Hutchinsons get their way

 

[JGR]

Was thought ever given to the Felixstowe rail traffic crossing the river Orwell south of Ipswich and going that way? I mean, that's what the competing A14 does, so why could the rail not have been built alongside it?

Apologies if all this has been discussed previously, - it's 'new to me'.

The A14 is to bypass having to drive through the already congested town centre. The current rail line through Ipswich doesn't have that problem.
Given that there's no pressing need for the line to go South of the town centre, it's far easier to go on the flat(ish), North of it, than it is to build a relatively huge bridge.

 

[jopsuk]

I can't conceive how the existing NLL could be 4 tracked? Apologies if I've misunderstood.

Tobbes

From Dalston to Highbury and Islington, and Caledonian Road to Camden East junction, it already is four track. Through the tunnel at Caledonian Road it goes to two track as operationally the ELL to H&L is seperate with a stock transfer connection. West of Camden East through to Camden West junction is a four track alignment, and Camden Road has two disused platforms. The tunnel at Caledonian Road is wide enough for four tracks.

There is a bottleneck on the alignment at Camden West junction. THere would need to be some land purchase and demolition. But that wouldn't be a huge cost. My proposal would link the ELL at H&L along the southern pair of tracks to the line to Primrose Hill junction and on to South Hampstead, with services running Watford-New Cross. I'd cease to have the Watford DC serve Euston, but would run this in conjunction with increasing frequency north of Harrow and Wealdstone using the Bakerloo. Perhaps needs a separate thread/ Doesn't quite belong in the insane proposals one...