Stansted Eastern Link

[CMS1]

It doesn't look like this has been thrashed specifically on this forum since 2014. However a lot has changed since then. Since 2014 Stansted passenger numbers have grown 50% from 20M to 30M, and its rail traffic has boomed 170% from 3,685,987 to 10,090,904.

And now Stansted have now got permission for a massive terminal expansion in order to handle 50M passengers (no extra runway required)! Is it time an eastern access was seriously considered, ideally part funded by Stansted? IMO they should fund better public transport links as part of the expansion (they funded the original station). It would be a 13 mile new line to Braintree via Dunmow, and there are various alignment options including the old line (now the Flitch way walkway), the A120 alignment or a new route north of Dunmow (in Braintree itself it would need to use the old route, and looks like the Flitch way could be rerouted by the river). Cambridge & Norwich have good road and rail connections currently but the rest of East Anglia has very poor road connections and non-existent rail connections to their local airport (Ipswich-Stansted is possible with a change but takes 2hrs vs 1hr by road). Rail is particularly attractive for airport travel as it can save hundreds in parking (Stansted is notoriosly expensive) and takes you right to the terminal. I guess it would need station expansion but if the services terminate there it won't impact the single track tunnel. It could be an extension of the Braintree services (connecting Chelmsford and South Essex) and a new Ipswich-Stansted service (reversing at Witham) connecting Suffolk/Colchester/North Essex.

However there are a lot of other new connections that it creates that could strengthen its business case, especially for Cambridge - it connects (potentially as direct services if the tunnel was doubled) Great Dunmow, Braintree, Chelmsford, Colchester (and surrounding towns) to Cambridge. Colchester-Cambridge is 25% shorter this way than via Ipswich and probably half the time given how slow Ipswich-Cambridge is.

In fact if you were running an Ipswich-Stansted and a Colchester-Cambridge, you could combine these and the Ipswich-Cambridge to create an East Anglian circle line as per below!

This would then enable further new connections such as connecting Newmarket commuters to the new Cambridge South etc.

 

[mike57]

Is it a good idea, Yes
Will it happen in even the remote foreseeable future, No

I cant see any government over the next few political cycles actually putting boots on the ground to build 13 miles of new railway anywhere in England. (Scotland and Wales may have different outcomes)

 

[Magdalia]

It doesn't look like this has been thrashed specifically on this forum since 2014.

I have only been on this forum since 2022, and have addressed this more than once in more general discussion.

and there are various alignment options including the old line (now the Flitch way walkway)

The old route is not an option. The line closed when the viaduct over the River Chelmer at Dunmow was declared unsafe, and it has since been demolished. In Dunmow the trackbed is now a road. Here is the viaduct shortly before demolition:

Dunmow (8), Langleys viaduct, 1976

This viaduct was just down the line towards Braintree.

www.flickr.com

Dunmow (8), Langleys viaduct, 1976​

This viaduct was just down the line towards Braintree.​

And now Stansted have now got permission for a massive terminal expansion in order to handle 50M passengers (no extra runway required)! Is it time an eastern access was seriously considered, ideally part funded by Stansted?

The Stansted expansion planning application last year addressed the transport issues, and concluded that the existing rail service could accommodate the increased traffic flows. The planning application has already been approved see here:

London Stansted Airport's passenger expansion plan approved

A district council votes to increase the airport's annual passenger numbers to 51 million.

www.bbc.co.uk

London Stansted Airport could become the UK's second busiest airport after councillors agreed to increase its annual passenger numbers to 51 million.

There is no plan to build a second runway or exceed the airport's limit of 274,000 flights a year, but the site's owner Manchester Airports Group wants to accommodate larger aeroplanes.

Uttlesford District Council's Planning Committee ruled in favour of the application earlier.

I guess it would need station expansion but if the services terminate there it won't impact the single track tunnel.

The single track tunnel is already at capacity with 4tph to/from Liverpool Street and 2tph to/from Cambridge.

(potentially as direct services if the tunnel was doubled)

The tunnel goes under the runway. How are you going to do that without significant disruption to planes and trains?

I guess it would need station expansion

Expanding the station is also very difficult and expensive.

 

[Farigiraf]

Is it a good idea, Yes
Will it happen in even the remote foreseeable future, No

Is the correct answer.

The Stansted expansion planning application last year addressed the transport issues, and concluded that the existing rail service could accommodate the increased traffic flows.

From London, maybe. But I doubt more than 10% of people from Chelmsford or Colchester take the bus to Stansted Airport. You'd increase that percentage significantly with a rail link.

While Braintree-Stansted is unlikely to be approved anytime in the near future, it would be nice to have some passive provision put in place for an eastern rail access link (including an expanded transport interchange) during construction of the airport expansion. If it's not done then, I doubt it'll ever happen.

 

[Magdalia]

From London, maybe.

Since 2014 Stansted passenger numbers have grown 50% from 20M to 30M, and its rail traffic has boomed 170% from 3,685,987 to 10,090,904.

For rail it is the flows to and from London that matter. Of that 10.1 million Stansted Airport entrances and exits in 2024/25, 6.5 million are Liverpool Street (the biggest flow on the network with one station out of London) and another 1.7 million are Tottenham Hale.

But I doubt more than 10% of people from Chelmsford or Colchester take the bus to Stansted Airport. You'd increase that percentage significantly with a rail link.

A bigger percentage of a small number is still a small number. For comparison, Cambridge-Stansted is only about 0.4 million.

There is no way that the amount of traffic from Chelmsford, Colchester and Ipswich is ever going to justify the huge costs of the engineering required to bring trains from that direction into the airport.

 

[cle]

Doubling the tunnel would be a good first step, but then platform capacity would be next, and also tricky.

I'm not sure what you could do - an external platform? Lengthen to get the 5 cars in p2?

 

[CMS1]

The line closed when the viaduct over the River Chelmer at Dunmow was declared unsafe, and it has since been demolished. In Dunmow the trackbed is now a road.

Yes aware of this but parts of it could be used so included it in options.

There is no way that the amount of traffic from Chelmsford, Colchester and Ipswich is ever going to justify the huge costs of the engineering required to bring trains from that direction into the airport.

It needs the breakdown of where abouts Stansted's 30M passengers are coming from to know if this is correct or not. But no such data is available it seems.

 

[Farigiraf]

For rail it is the flows to and from London that matter. Of that 10.1 million Stansted Airport entrances and exits in 2024/25, 6.5 million are Liverpool Street (the biggest flow on the network with one station out of London) and another 1.7 million are Tottenham Hale.

I know it's a London Airport, but it was built in Essex and therefore the people in Essex should be able to access it feasibly as well. In a public transport-focused world (not the one we're in, but the one we should be in) this involves a faster and higher capacity public transport link than a few double-deckers from one or two cities. I agree that Essex-Stansted traffic alone is unlikely to justify a rail reinstatement but the OP has outlined how this would be an east-west rail link through Essex, something that doesn't exist yet. Cambridge-Chelmsford is a great example of a journey that would be made by many people if there was a direct and affordable rail service - currently everyone drives.

Pointing out existing passenger flows isn't very helpful when discussing a project that makes travelling by rail between two places go from unfeasible to convenient. Of course London has over half the modal share, but you can't deny that partly the reason for that is because that's the only place (bar Cambridge, Harlow & Bishop's Stortford) that Stansted Airport has a frequent rail service to. It wouldn't hurt to at least try and convert a few million extra journeys to rail from places other than London.

 

[zwk500]

It wouldn't hurt to at least try and convert a few million extra journeys to rail from places other than London.

It will if it requires north of a billion quid to do so. It might be worth the pain in the end, but it's still a significant amount of money to generate or borrow. This proposal could easily require costs in that area because of the need to completely reconstruct a station underneath a very busy airport, a tunnel under the runway, and build at least part of a brand new alignment.

 

[Farigiraf]

It will if it requires north of a billion quid to do so.

That's the harsh reality of things. IMO a major flaw with the design of the airport & its rail facilities in the first place. Quite eye-opening when you consider that they built the branch to the WAML for under £100 million.

I'll repeat that it would be crucial to implement some passive provision while they're expanding the airport for the chance that they do eventually find the money for this though. Would likely save tens of millions.

 

[zwk500]

Yes aware of this but parts of it could be used so included it in options.

Tbh given the alignments it's not worth trying to use the old route anywhere except for linking up to Braintree.

See the Pink (old route) vs red (potential serving Great Dunmow) and Green options (slightly better alignment direct to Braintree). Red also avoids an additional crossing of the A120 and any issues with cutting Rayne in half. (see this image of the old alignment in Rayne: https://maps.app.goo.gl/CzqrLX4tB1LN86F47)

It needs the breakdown of where abouts Stansted's 30M passengers are coming from to know if this is correct or not. But no such data is available it seems.

The ORR publishes Origin-Destination matrices for rail, and Stansted will have stats of how many passengers are on it's routes for air arrivals.

 

[CMS1]

The ORR publishes Origin-Destination matrices for rail, and Stansted will have stats of how many passengers are on it's routes for air arrivals.

30M is the curent annual number of air passengers using Stansted. To tell if an eastern link is worthwhile, among other things you need to know where these passengers are coming from. Stansted will know this as they will have all their customers addresses, but no breakdown seems to be public.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Feb 2026 ==

See the Pink (old route) vs red (potential serving Great Dunmow) and Green options (slightly better alignment direct to Braintree). Red also avoids an additional crossing of the A120 and any issues with cutting Rayne in half. (see this image of the old alignment in Rayne: https://maps.app.goo.gl/CzqrLX4tB1LN86F47)View attachment 198527

Thanks

 

[zwk500]

30M is the curent annual number of air passengers using Stansted. To tell if an eastern link is worthwhile, among other things you need to know where these passengers are coming from. Stansted will know this as they will have all their customers addresses, but no breakdown seems to be public.

Like these:

The success of the Ryanair model means that, uniquely for a major airport, over 40% of Stansted pax originate outside the UK.

From: https://assets.live.dxp.maginfrastr...03dcc/v2-london-stansted-retail-pack-2025.pdf

 

[Topological]

Last time Stansted came up, I did wonder whether a route could be produced to loop round the end of the runway to the North East. That way the current route could be towards Stansted and away could be via the loop (or vice versa - whichever avoids crossing moves)

IF the new capacity was eaten up then some additional reversing platforms would be needed, but theoretically we would not get there.

 

[The exile]

30M is the curent annual number of air passengers using Stansted. To tell if an eastern link is worthwhile, among other things you need to know where these passengers are coming from. Stansted will know this as they will have all their customers addresses,

Do they? Where would they get it from?
Even if they did, it wouldn’t tell them where people were actually arriving from.

 

[CMS1]

Like these:

From: https://assets.live.dxp.maginfrastr...03dcc/v2-london-stansted-retail-pack-2025.pdf

Thanks! That puts Essex and Suffolk at 20% of the flow, which suggests 6M passengers last year (and if 51M reached and the %s stayed the same, then 10M)

If we look at Cambridgeshire as a comparable region (not London which has lower car ownership), Cambridgeshire was 12% of the passengers in those figures. If we assume that percentage hasn't changed then 3.6M passengers were from Cambridgeshire last year, of which, using the ORR data, 912k used rail (counting each way separately to match the airport stats) That's 25.3% using rail. If we apply that to 6M passengers from Essex & Suffolk in 2025 that's a current rail demand of 1,518,000 passengers (not allowing for growth). Obviously the new link won't be in the right place for everyone in Essex and Suffolk, but that also applies to Cambridgeshire so is catered for by the 25.3%

 

[Farigiraf]

A thought I had - would it be a better idea to send a new rail route round the edge of the airport, with a new Stansted East station located near where the new terminal would be? You'd still need a monorail/DART solution (which happens to be closing this year ) to link the main terminal but it'd save likely hundreds of millions compared to tunneling under the existing runway. Rather than joining the branch line, the line could join the WAML near Newport or Elsenham.

 

[zwk500]

Thanks! That puts Essex and Suffolk at 20% of the flow

No it doesn't, it puts Essex (12%) and Suffolk (5%) at 17% of the OUTBOUND originating flow, which is 60% of the passenger flow at Stansted. 60% of 30m is 18m, and 17% of that is just over 3m. (2019 had 28m passengers so the total of 2.8m in the table would fit rather well with my workings).

All your assumptions need cutting in half.

 

[CMS1]

No it doesn't, it puts Essex (12%) and Suffolk (5%) at 17% of the OUTBOUND originating flow, which is 60% of the passenger flow at Stansted. 60% of 30m is 18m, and 17% of that is just over 3m.

I was going by the Essex & Suffolk number (2.8M) as a percentage of the total (12.5). Using the 17% and assuming the same proportion inbound and outbound, that suggests the current rail demand is 1,290,000. Plus the Cambridgeshire - Essex travel not involving the airport, e.g. Cambridge-Chelmsford.

 

[zwk500]

I was going by the Essex & Suffolk number (2.8M) as a percentage of the total (12.5). Using the 17% and assuming the same proportion inbound and outbound, that suggests the current rail demand is 1,290,000. Plus the Cambridgeshire - Essex travel not involving the airport, e.g. Cambridge-Chelmsford.

If you sum the percentage column, it doesn't come to 100 (instead coming to 75%). So if you want to go by absolute numbers, then it's 12.5/0.75 = 16.67, 2.8/16.67=17%.

Just to check - are you claiming that there's potential demand for 1.29m single rail journeys for Essex alone (I.e. 650k people making a return trip)?

FWIW probably a good idea checking against a comparator with both-way rail access like Luton or Gatwick to sense-check. Sussex is probably quite a high proportion to Gatwick Airport by rail.

 

[CMS1]

Just to check - are you claiming that there's potential demand for 1.29m single rail journeys for Essex alone (I.e. 650k people making a return trip)?

It's for Essex and Suffolk, but also needs adjusting for Cambridgeshire at 9% not 12%, and also included too many stations in Cambridgeshire!. So new calculation with updated figures:

Essex and Suffolk are 17% of the outbound flow, and assuming same ratio for inbound, that suggests 5.1M passengers last year.
Cambridgeshire was at 9%, which suggests 2.7M passengers last year
Cambridgeshire <> Stansted Airport rail journeys were 575k in the last ORR figures. That's 22% using rail.
If we apply that to 5.1M passengers from Essex & Suffolk, that's a current rail demand of 1,122,000 passengers.

 

[Magdalia]

To tell if an eastern link is worthwhile, among other things you need to know where these passengers are coming from.

The ORR publishes Origin-Destination matrices for rail

The existing ORR data for the trains via Cambridge give a good guide for the numbers of Stansted Airport journeys from/to other East of England stations that might use rail if it was an option. Here are some of the ORR numbers for 2024/25, the one way figures on Rail Data that are more than 20k.

Cambridge 215k
Peterborough 53k
Norwich 47k
Ely 22k

And that's all. Kings Lynn is next at 11k.

An eastern link only has 4 stations likely to generate more than 20k journeys: Braintree, Chelmsford, Colchester and Ipswich. None of them will generate as many as Cambridge.

Plus the Cambridgeshire - Essex travel not involving the airport, e.g. Cambridge-Chelmsford.

Cambridge-Chelmsford is a great example of a journey that would be made by many people if there was a direct and affordable rail service - currently everyone drives.

Cambridge-Chelmsford in 2024/25 was just over 2k one way journeys. 10 of those were me.

Numbers of this magnitude are not big enough to justify spending more than £1 billion on new infrastructure.

 

[Farigiraf]

Cambridge-Chelmsford in 2024/25 was just over 2k one way journeys. 10 of those were me.

Are there any figures for how many trips are made by car between the two cities? I suspect it'll be 100k+. Cambridge-Chelmsford is an excellent example of where using existing rail usage figures is a useless measure for seeing how busy the flow actually is, as currently there is effectively zero rail connection - no person with a viable alternative will go via London or Ipswich, especially given the prices.

None of them will generate as many as Cambridge.

Large numbers of people who work at Stansted live around Chelmsford, and with the new Beaulieu Park station, even those not immediately near a train station have the option of feasibly using the train.

 

[Magdalia]

Are there any figures for how many trips are made by car between the two cities? I suspect it'll be 100k+. Cambridge-Chelmsford is an excellent example of where using existing rail usage figures is a useless measure for seeing how busy the flow actually is, as currently there is effectively zero rail connection - no person with a viable alternative will go via London or Ipswich, especially given the prices.

We can look at the ORR data in 2024/25 for comparable journeys from Cambridge. Peterborough, Kings Lynn and Norwich were all about 80k one way journeys. Chelmsford (or Colchester) wouldn't be bigger than any of those, and would probably be nearer to Ipswich, which was 33k.

Large numbers of people who work at Stansted live around Chelmsford, and with the new Beaulieu Park station, even those not immediately near a train station have the option of feasibly using the train.

Again we can look at comparable journeys in the ORR data for 2024/25. Large numbers of people working at Stansted Airport live in Bishops Stortford, and the one way flow was 103k. The one way flow from Harlow Town, more directly comparable with Chelmsford, was 35k.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm not sure what you could do - an external platform? Lengthen to get the 5 cars in p2?

P2 has been extended to its practical maximum length already. To extend further means either completely remodelling all the layout at Stansted, or knocking down part of the terminal building.

It needs the breakdown of where abouts Stansted's 30M passengers are coming from to know if this is correct or not.

Well half of them are coming from the arrivals hall…

The tunnel goes under the runway. How are you going to do that without significant disruption to planes and trains?

The existing tunnel was designed in such a way that a second tunnel can be constructed alongside relatively easily. There would be little disruption for rail services, save for tieing it in at each end. And getting under the live runway / taxiways is no different in principle to tunnelling under a live motorway, which is done relatively frequently.

The bigger question, though, is “why double it?”. There’s no where the trains could go without major investment elsewhere.

 

[cle]

6tph to Cherry Hinton

Jokes aside, it's not easy. All Norwich and Birmingham services (doable today?) and the second Cambridge hourly that once existed. Ipswich I guess?

The Bish terminator could go into there too of course.

 

[Bald Rick]

6tph to Cherry Hinton

Jokes aside, it's not easy. All Norwich and Birmingham services (doable today?) and the second Cambridge hourly that once existed. Ipswich I guess?

The Bish terminator could go into there too of course.

No capacity through Cambridge and to Shepreth Branch Junction for that, at least not without major investment.

Fair point about the Stortford terminator, although that would need an additional platform at the airport.

 

[CMS1]

The bigger question, though, is “why double it?”.

I don't think its required for a new eastern access. I would run a new Ipswich-Stansted, and extend the London-Braintree services to Cambridge using the current Cambridge-Birmingham path, as with EWR Cambridge doesn't need this route (run a new separate Cambridge-Peterborough).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 19 Feb 2026 ==

See the Pink (old route) vs red (potential serving Great Dunmow) and Green options (slightly better alignment direct to Braintree). Red also avoids an additional crossing of the A120 and any issues with cutting Rayne in half. (see this image of the old alignment in Rayne: https://maps.app.goo.gl/CzqrLX4tB1LN86F47)View attachment 198527

The ORR publishes Origin-Destination matrices for rail, and Stansted will have stats of how many passengers are on it's routes for air arrivals.

Another route only slightly longer is a new line straight from Chelmsford. This knocks off about 10 miles off for Chelmsford and beyond (southwards), and whilst it adds 6 miles for Colchester/Ipswich, it cuts out the slow and single track Witham-Braintree section so possibly similar time. The main disadvantage is missing out Braintree/Dunmow. I.e:

 

[MP33]

The X30 Bus, which runs from Southend to Stansted, is not the most reliable of services. The delays whilst passengers with heavy luggage enter and leave at Chelmsford. Makes a mess of the rest of the route.

 

[Magdalia]

that would need an additional platform at the airport.

Platform capacity at Stansted Airport is an existing constraint. In particular it makes it very difficult to run longer trains on the routes via Cambridge. The Stansted Express occupying each of the two long platforms for two 20 minute periods every hour isn't something that's going to change, which leaves very limited capacity for other services.

Any proposal for new lines has to start with how to add platform capacity for more trains.

Another route only slightly longer is a new line straight from Chelmsford.

Going south from Chelmsford the first place that could realistically be used to build a junction is between Hylands Park and Margaretting, which is about halfway to Ingatestone. There is no spare capacity on this section of the GEML. This will never be more than a line drawn on a map.