Why so long to develop East - West Rail?

[Philip Phlopp]

So since you guys all know a lot more about this than me, can you please tell me when realistically you see a Bedford-Oxford service up and running?

Thats all people want to know.

My bets - December 2020 to May 2021. I can't quite decide which date I find most likely yet.

It might yet run on time, it'll depend largely on the outcome of the Hendy Report and any additional funding committed by George Osborne in the Autumn Statement to try and bring the existing CP5 projects back on some sort of revised schedule.

 

[DarloRich]

So since you guys all know a lot more about this than me, can you please tell me when realistically you see a Bedford-Oxford service up and running?

Thats all people want to know.

I dont know but as the planner says:

2019 if the Hendy review doesnt delay it. So basically when they said it would.

if it does then closer to Phillip Plopp:

My bets - December 2020 to May 2021. I can't quite decide which date I find most likely yet.

There may well be trains running on the MK-Oxford section before then, but that may depend on the spending reviews and whether, or not, electrification goes ahead

It might yet run on time, it'll depend largely on the outcome of the Hendy Report and any additional funding committed by George Osborne in the Autumn Statement to try and bring the existing CP5 projects back on some sort of revised schedule.

I cant see extra monies coming through (although that would be great) and while i don't think this project will be cancelled (due to all the third party funding) there is a possibility it might all get binned.

Just to help people understand the level of work required here is the list of structures:

https://consultations.networkrail.c...s/Appendix E Table of existing structures.pdf

and the list of level crossings: https://consultations.networkrail.c... of proposals to existing level crossings.pdf

here is the stakeholder pack: https://consultations.networkrail.c...sultation Pack September 2015 Version 1.1.pdf

 

[HowardGWR]

Just to help people understand the level of work required here is the list of structures:

https://consultations.networkrail.c...s/Appendix E Table of existing structures.pdf

and the list of level crossings: https://consultations.networkrail.c... of proposals to existing level crossings.pdf

here is the stakeholder pack: https://consultations.networkrail.c...sultation Pack September 2015 Version 1.1.pdf

Anyone any idea why the chief doc refers appendix A and C - 'see separate files' - but these links are left off on the web site?

 

[DarloRich]

Anyone any idea why the chief doc refers appendix A and C - 'see separate files' - but these links are left off on the web site?

I guess because they are vast files with every drawing in them. The appropriate ones (ie impacting on the local community) will be on show at the consultation venues

For instance: for each crossing (and there are LOTS on this line) there are several drawing files on the proposed alterations and changes etc

 

[ironstone11]

I guess because they are vast files with every drawing in them.

Yes if you go to Here on the NR/EWR website the reason is given.

Please note: The file sizes of documents Appendices A (Consultation Drawings) , C (Highway overbridges and accommodation crossings plans) and G (Environmental Features Plans) are large. Please email ewrconsultation@networkrail.co.uk to request these.

 

[HowardGWR]

Yes if you go to Here on the NR/EWR website the reason is given.

Thanks chaps. I was actually expecting a map with the locations of the various works, which of course would have been much smaller in file size. I can see now that indeed the file with all the individual drawings on them must be huge. I had a look at a few by using the location names in the lists to access Google Earth and Street View. There are some interesting crossings where, for instance, the plan to provide a bridge instead of a level crossing will provide the opportunity to remove some awkward reverse bends in the existing road. I assume that the local authorities will be stumping up for a goodly portion of these costs.

 

[ironstone11]

I was actually expecting a map with the locations of the various works, which of course would have been much smaller in file size.

On the website referred to above, there is an interactive map where different structures can be selected. Depending on what is proposed a detailed map can be selected.

Having some knowledge of the area I discovered two errors, road over rail bridges and one road under rail (A41) to be out of date - work has already been done! And that was just very local to Aylesbury.

 

[richieb1971]

Thanks for everyones input.

 

[Chris125]

The consultation appears to suggest work will be needed between Bletchley and Milton Keynes, do we know what this might be?

 

[The Planner]

Level crossings and track depending on what speed they choose. It is likely to need an element of enhancement around Fenny Stratford.

 

[DarloRich]

Level crossings and track depending on what speed they choose. It is likely to need an element of enhancement around Fenny Stratford.

I have seen suggestions of a doubling of the line between Fenny Stratford and Bow Brickhill ( is the A5 bridge suitable?) and a second platform at Fenny. The track work around the junction with the fly over might need some work to along with some signal works

Our crossing is staying as a bridge seems impractical without destroying an entire street of houses and businesses

Fine station Fenny Stratford

 

[MarkRedon]

All this together with new high-level platforms at Bletchley itself: http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/east-west-rail-route/. It seems that Oxford to Bedford trains will not call at Milton Keynes Central: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/east-west-rail/

 

[DarloRich]

Yes sadly Oxford - Bedford wont run to MK and neither will we get the much promised Marston Vale - MK service..............................

 

[jimm]

All this together with new high-level platforms at Bletchley itself: http://www.eastwestrail.org.uk/east-west-rail-route/. It seems that Oxford to Bedford trains will not call at Milton Keynes Central: http://www.networkrail.co.uk/east-west-rail/

There's never been any intention that that would be the case, due to the time penalty involved. With hourly trains from Reading/Oxford and Aylesbury going into Milton Keynes Central people from those directions will be catered for anyway. Bedford-MKC passengers will still have to change at Bletchley but with fast limited-stop (or non-stop Bedford to Bletchley if long-distance trains between the East Midlands and South West go this way) trains added to the mix on the Marston Vale line, journey times should come down markedly.

 

[Philip Phlopp]

I have seen suggestions of a doubling of the line between Fenny Stratford and Bow Brickhill ( is the A5 bridge suitable?) and a second platform at Fenny.

A quick Google survey reveals the A5 bridge to be a single track structure, as is the bridge over the River Ouzel. Signalling would need sorted anyway as it's all sitting on what would be the trackbed for the second track.

You would think twin track bridges cost about ten times the cost of a single track bridge given the number that have been thrown up in recent years, including the new Hardengreen Viaduct on the Borders route.

It's about as annoying as planners who didn't think they might want to fit an extra carriageway (or even a hard shoulder) underneath a bridge over a dual carriageway or motorway.

There's probably a nice Honours project for a civil engineering student somewhere, calculating how much money we've spent (err, wasted) in the last 50 years rebuilding road and rail bridges that were too narrow, to short, or made out of papier mâché.

 

[D365]

You would think twin track bridges cost about ten times the cost of a single track bridge given the number that have been thrown up in recent years, including the new Hardengreen Viaduct on the Borders route.

It's about as annoying as planners who didn't think they might want to fit an extra carriageway (or even a hard shoulder) underneath a bridge over a dual carriageway or motorway.

Several small overbridges on the ECML approach to Peterborough (Yaxley) which span only the two tracks and have left no room for a future widened trackbed

There's probably a nice Honours project for a civil engineering student somewhere, calculating how much money we've spent (err, wasted) in the last 50 years rebuilding road and rail bridges that were too narrow, to short, or made out of papier mâché.

A shame that I'm not doing civil then

 

[DarloRich]

There's never been any intention that that would be the case, due to the time penalty involved. With hourly trains from Reading/Oxford and Aylesbury going into Milton Keynes Central people from those directions will be catered for anyway. Bedford-MKC passengers will still have to change at Bletchley but with fast limited-stop (or non-stop Bedford to Bletchley if long-distance trains between the East Midlands and South West go this way) trains added to the mix on the Marston Vale line, journey times should come down markedly.

there has certainly been an aspiration for direct Bedford - MKC trains under LM. When that will be delivered always seems to slip to the next timetable

Hell we had our service turned off for the best part of a month one Christmas to enable the track work to be done at Bletchley. We were promised direct trains after that. We are still waiting on the Vale for these trains. IN my view ( and in the virew of plenty of others inc the Commuinty Rail Partnership)

That lack of a direct Bedford - MKC service is severally reducing the number of passengers. Normal people simply don't want to change trains ( and the grotty platform 6 /lack of lift at Bletchley really puts people off) and while the service is so poor and often unreliable they have no incentive to change their mode of transport. There has been so much house building along the Vale (with more to come) and a great deal of inward commuting from these areas to MK that the train really should be a sensible and quick ( and for the TOC profitable) way of getting to work. That is before you consider the number of people who drive to Bletchley or Bedford to commute to London! The fact that the line it isn't a success is such a shame.

Local passengers on the Vale will get little benefit until the service is electrified.

 

[CdBrux]

What holds back Bedford to MKC services, is it the infrastructure or availability of rolling stock? If the latter would the vivarail D trains be an option?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The timetable I think. But there is a risk of introducing something that is likely to be taken away with East West Rail.

 

[swt_passenger]

But there is a risk of introducing something that is likely to be taken away with East West Rail.

Bedford to Milton Keynes direct services have been consistently ruled out, especially by the EWR group.

Rumours have been around ever since the bay platform at MKC was built - and they seem to be repeated every few months in these forums, but never die down despite various denials.

 

[DarloRich]

What holds back Bedford to MKC services, is it the infrastructure or availability of rolling stock? If the latter would the vivarail D trains be an option?

The main issue is that the only connection from the Marston Vale to the northbound WCML means using platform 5 at Bletchley and reversing. LM are not keen on this as this is also the only southern facing access to Bletchley carriage sidings and don't want to loose operational flexibility.

In my view, with a tweak of the timetable, you could be in and out of platform 5 in a jiffy rather, than as now, have to spend the time between services sat in the platform.

and we don't want the D train's thanks - would rather keep our 150/153 combo!

Bedford to Milton Keynes direct services have been consistently ruled out, especially by the EWR group.

Rumours have been around ever since the bay platform at MKC was built - and they seem to be repeated every few months in these forums, but never die down despite various denials.

odd that as meetings i have attended with the community rail group and LM directly contradict your statement. I will bow to your superior knowledge.

E-W have constantly responded to requests about matter this with phraseology around this being an "aspiration"

 

[richieb1971]

I've always wondered how a train would go directly from the Vale line to MKC. In order to get the right turn from Bletchley depot it would require a steep incline and go over the top of a great big building. Or knock the building down. Or go under the bridge as the trains do now and have some kind of right turn down there. However, that would shorten a lot of sidings.

Or somehow build a railway that comes in from the north of MKC from Bedford and hit the Oxford stretch at Bletchley. Which seems the best option by far on paper, without cost constraints.

 

[jimm]

there has certainly been an aspiration for direct Bedford - MKC trains under LM. When that will be delivered always seems to slip to the next timetable

Hell we had our service turned off for the best part of a month one Christmas to enable the track work to be done at Bletchley. We were promised direct trains after that. We are still waiting on the Vale for these trains. IN my view ( and in the virew of plenty of others inc the Commuinty Rail Partnership)

That lack of a direct Bedford - MKC service is severally reducing the number of passengers. Normal people simply don't want to change trains ( and the grotty platform 6 /lack of lift at Bletchley really puts people off) and while the service is so poor and often unreliable they have no incentive to change their mode of transport. There has been so much house building along the Vale (with more to come) and a great deal of inward commuting from these areas to MK that the train really should be a sensible and quick ( and for the TOC profitable) way of getting to work. That is before you consider the number of people who drive to Bletchley or Bedford to commute to London! The fact that the line it isn't a success is such a shame.

Local passengers on the Vale will get little benefit until the service is electrified.

Well last time I looked, MK Council, Bucks and Bedfordshire were all members of the East West Consortium, yet there is no sign of them backing direct services.

And whether under present conditions, or in future, there will always be a need to reverse at Bletchley, with the consequent time penalty. Nor will an all-stations train stopping every mile or two be that much quicker in future, even with electric traction.

With four or five trains an hour already between Milton Keynes Central and Bletchley, and a couple of East-West trains to come as well, passengers won't need to look at a timetable for that leg of their journey anyway. The station facilities for platform 6 at Bletchley can and should be sorted out and, with the disability access legislation, will have to be.

 

[DarloRich]

I've always wondered how a train would go directly from the Vale line to MKC. In order to get the right turn from Bletchley depot it would require a steep incline and go over the top of a great big building. Or knock the building down. Or go under the bridge as the trains do now and have some kind of right turn down there. However, that would shorten a lot of sidings.

Or somehow build a railway that comes in from the north of MKC from Bedford and hit the Oxford stretch at Bletchley. Which seems the best option by far on paper, without cost constraints.

reversal in platform 5 at Bletchley is the only practical option

 

[jimm]

I've always wondered how a train would go directly from the Vale line to MKC. In order to get the right turn from Bletchley depot it would require a steep incline and go over the top of a great big building. Or knock the building down. Or go under the bridge as the trains do now and have some kind of right turn down there. However, that would shorten a lot of sidings.

Or somehow build a railway that comes in from the north of MKC from Bedford and hit the Oxford stretch at Bletchley. Which seems the best option by far on paper, without cost constraints.

And how would you propose to serve Bletchley (and the rest of the southern part of Milton Keynes) if you created an east-north curve?

 

[swt_passenger]

E-W have constantly responded to requests about matter this with phraseology around this being an "aspiration"

I'm just going by various EWR documentation that I've been reading for possibly 5 or 6 years now, some of which is no longer available on the website. I don't think a user aspiration, however regularly repeated, means much.

I just did a search of the 2010 Grip 4 study report, (which I've downloaded before) and cannot find any reference to an MKC to BDM service, even though possibly half of the 240 page document is discussing potential traffic flows.

 

[DarloRich]

Well last time I looked, MK Council, Bucks and Bedfordshire were all members of the East West Consortium, yet there is no sign of them backing direct services.

And whether under present conditions, or in future, there will always be a need to reverse at Bletchley, with the consequent time penalty. Nor will an all-stations train stopping every mile or two be that much quicker in future, even with electric traction.

With four or five trains an hour already between Milton Keynes Central and Bletchley, and a couple of East-West trains to come as well, passengers won't need to look at a timetable for that leg of their journey anyway. The station facilities for platform 6 at Bletchley can and should be sorted out and, with the disability access legislation, will have to be.

the point is that real people WONT travel with a change of trains. it really puts them off. I know plenty of people in my office who are put off for that reason alone.

the connections are also quite poor north bound. Consider the 0814 arrival into Bletchley (which SHOULD) be ideal for arriving at work in MK 9 The largest centre in the area) for 0900. This train is timetabled to arrive at Bletchley at 0814 but is often late - 5 minutes late today for instance

We now have an official connection to the 0819 (which we did not have in the past - thanks to hard campaigning from passengers and the Community Rail group) to MK but we often miss that. The next train is 0844. Not a long wait in the grand scheme of things but more than enough to put people off as Bletchley is so grotty and P3 offers no shelter at all.

And the local authorities back the idea but don't want/cant to pay for it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've always wondered how a train would go directly from the Vale line to MKC.

By reversing in platform 5. There is time in the diagrams to do this, but there is perhaps not capacity on the WCML for it. And it would be difficult at peak times, where platform 5 is used for starting/terminating trains, and 6 doesn't I believe have access to the WCML northbound.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

as Bletchley is so grotty and P3 offers no shelter at all.

It's quite bleak and grey, but I wouldn't call it grotty - it is clean and well maintained with functional PIS and a heated ticket office building open 24/7, and there are overall roofs on all but platform 6. Many people would be crying out for that kind of station, even if it could do with brightening up a bit.

 

[DarloRich]

By reversing in platform 5. There is time in the diagrams to do this, but there is perhaps not capacity on the WCML for it. And it would be difficult at peak times, where platform 5 is used for starting/terminating trains, and 6 doesn't I believe have access to the WCML northbound.

not since the trackworks a few Christmases ago.

it needs a bit of a rethink timetable wise but should not be insurmountable IF the desire/obligation to run such a service existed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

With four or five trains an hour already between Milton Keynes Central and Bletchley, and a couple of East-West trains to come as well, passengers won't need to look at a timetable for that leg of their journey anyway. The station facilities for platform 6 at Bletchley can and should be sorted out and, with the disability access legislation, will have to be.

I never understood what possessed them to add lifts for all but one platform. It must have saved a tiny amount in comparison to the inconvenience it causes. Perhaps the long term view was of a move to 5, but now that is used by WCML starters/terminators at peak times.

Of course a number of those starters/terminators are extended Tring stoppers that serve Bletchley because the units/crew are based there, so if Tring stoppers go to Crossrail perhaps the need for the use of 5 may be reduced? Though I like the 0714, a most civilised train