East-West Rail (EWR): Oxford-Bletchley construction progress

[Benjwri]

That will be bang smack inside the HS2 depot. It will be diverted or stopped up.

In the plans it’s diverted through a woodland they are creating along the depot boundary, then up onto the Perry Hill overbridge with the road. The other side will also no longer cross EWR, instead crossing with the road underbridge.

 

[swt_passenger]

That will be bang smack inside the HS2 depot. It will be diverted or stopped up.

Yes, it’s shown as stopped up in the map extract I posted in #317. The key on the whole map explains the crosses on the orange dotted line. It’s linked in that post and is much clearer..

 

[Peter Sarf]

To make life easier I have quoted the post that shows the planned end result.

HS2's depot: https://assets.publishing.service.g.../file/378380/C222-ATK-CV-DPL-020-000016_0.pdf

View attachment 106010

In the plans it’s diverted through a woodland they are creating along the depot boundary, then up onto the Perry Hill overbridge with the road. The other side will also no longer cross EWR, instead crossing with the road underbridge.

Does look to be.

Yes, it’s shown as stopped up in the map extract I posted in #317. The key on the whole map explains the crosses on the orange dotted line. It’s linked in that post and is much clearer..

I wonder about that green park area to the ESE of the crossing - on the side of the cusrve that links the two lines. I that is raised land then ideal maybe.

I also wonder about the no mans land on the other side of the curve. The bit in the triangle bounded by two lines and the curve.

 

[swt_passenger]

There’s also a different map of the Calvert area that shows a maintenance road for the balancing ponds on the north side of the trees along the boundary at the north side of the maintenance depot, and if you magnify it the access road has an orange line signifying a new footpath route, it runs out to the gas pumping station. As someone suggested there’s a footpath alongside EWR west of the new road bridge, it no longer has a footpath crossing over EWR, it now runs all the way to the EWR ‘Main Street’ road bridge. (That’s the westernmost point of EWR on this version of the map.)

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7f5724e5274a2e8ab4b960/C222-ATK-CV-DPP-020-000009-FPD.pdf

 

[work-traveller]

Some construction updates:

Bletchley High Level Station


Bletchley Flyover


Salden Wood


Swanbourne Station (former site)


Moco Farm (bridge jacking trail)


Winslow Station



Verney Junction (former site)


Claydon Loop (east end)



Some construction updates (2 of 2):

Claydon Loop (+ HS2 Interchange & Claydon Curve)


HS2 Calvert IMD Turnout


Launton Station (former site)


Charbridge Lane

 

[WesternBiker]

Some construction updates:

Bletchley High Level Station
View attachment 152662

Bletchley Flyover
View attachment 152663

Salden Wood
View attachment 152664

Swanbourne Station (former site)
View attachment 152665

Moco Farm (bridge jacking trail)
View attachment 152666

Winslow Station
View attachment 152668
View attachment 152669

Verney Junction (former site)
View attachment 152670

Claydon Loop (east end)
View attachment 152671


Some construction updates (2 of 2):

Claydon Loop (+ HS2 Interchange & Claydon Curve)
View attachment 152672

HS2 Calvert IMD Turnout
View attachment 152673

Launton Station (former site)
View attachment 152674

Charbridge Lane
View attachment 152675

A really great set of pictures. Thank you.

 

[EIKN]

A fabulous set of photos there , if I may I have a couple of questions, first the old style three arch bridge , ( which reminds of those on the former great central railway,- mainline ), the right hand arch looks bricked up, wasn't there track running under that arch at one point ? Perhaps a holding siding for freight perhaps, when the line was previously open . I recall seeing an earlier photo where they ran new track through just such an arch (!the third arch ) although I cannot recall the location.

Also the four track sections where it appears they have built a very short siding that stops right against the bridge , is that the line from Aylesbury ( vale ?) My apologies I live in far southwest Scotland, and am not up on the local geography of this railway,
I notice the other photo where they have sets of points where again a short stub of track is laid, alongside I.notice there is some form of industrial site, is that stub of track to serve that , or are these tracks the very first HS2 tracks laid, as I thought that in one section Ewr and HS2 run alongside each other ?, or do I have that wrong ?., I understand that there wass supposed to hsve been a new train maintenance depot ,( nsybe for HS2?) If so are the extra tracks for that ?.
my apologies for not knowing , but due to very ill health my memory is very poor, and I genuinely cannot remember the layout , it lay of the land so to speak .
either way if these extra tracks are for HS2 the. They must surely be the first track sections of the new HS2 line .
finally the spur of track for the Calvert IMD is this for Ewr or HS2?.

again my apologies for all the questions but I'm trying to work out how this all fits together or will fit together.

anyway and most importantly thank you for sharing these photos they are excellent

 

[richieb1971]

4 track is Hs2 connection.

 

[swt_passenger]

A fabulous set of photos there , if I may I have a couple of questions, first the old style three arch bridge , ( which reminds of those on the former great central railway,- mainline ), the right hand arch looks bricked up, wasn't there track running under that arch at one point ? Perhaps a holding siding for freight perhaps, when the line was previously open . I recall seeing an earlier photo where they ran new track through just such an arch (!the third arch ) although I cannot recall the location.

Also the four track sections where it appears they have built a very short siding that stops right against the bridge , is that the line from Aylesbury ( vale ?) My apologies I live in far southwest Scotland, and am not up on the local geography of this railway,
I notice the other photo where they have sets of points where again a short stub of track is laid, alongside I.notice there is some form of industrial site, is that stub of track to serve that , or are these tracks the very first HS2 tracks laid, as I thought that in one section Ewr and HS2 run alongside each other ?, or do I have that wrong ?., I understand that there wass supposed to hsve been a new train maintenance depot ,( nsybe for HS2?) If so are the extra tracks for that ?.
my apologies for not knowing , but due to very ill health my memory is very poor, and I genuinely cannot remember the layout , it lay of the land so to speak .
either way if these extra tracks are for HS2 the. They must surely be the first track sections of the new HS2 line .
finally the spur of track for the Calvert IMD is this for Ewr or HS2?.

again my apologies for all the questions but I'm trying to work out how this all fits together or will fit together.

anyway and most importantly thank you for sharing these photos they are excellent

I don’t see a bricked up arch in the only three arch bridge, in the seventh photo, it’s a grass embankment, just west of Winslow station?

EWR crosses HS2. The only connection is through the HS2 infrastructure maintenance depot, (IMD), not a train maintenance depot, that’s the rightmost track in the eleventh photo. I think the short stubs of track at either end of the loop might be long enough for loco run round? It’s difficult to tell in these views. The signal plan linked in post #629 suggests position lights in the short track sections, so maybe they are for loco run round.

It’s only the Aylesbury link that will actually run alongside HS2, that’s if they ever get round to building it. Thats roughly from Calvert to the former Quainton closed station, where the lines diverge again. The formation for the future Aylesbury curve is being made ready, it’s on the left in the tenth photo, roughly alongside the crossover, looking west. Currently the relevant points and signalling are not being fitted.

 

[Benjwri]

Also the four track sections where it appears they have built a very short siding that stops right against the bridge , is that the line from Aylesbury ( vale ?) My apologies I live in far southwest Scotland, and am not up on the local geography of this railway,
I notice the other photo where they have sets of points where again a short stub of track is laid, alongside I.notice there is some form of industrial site, is that stub of track to serve that , or are these tracks the very first HS2 tracks laid, as I thought that in one section Ewr and HS2 run alongside each other ?, or do I have that wrong ?., I understand that there wass supposed to hsve been a new train maintenance depot ,( nsybe for HS2?) If so are the extra tracks for that ?.

The 4 track section is all at Calvert, and is a temporary railhead for HS2, which will allow them to deliver materials for HS2 and the infrastructure depot by rail, keeping lorries off the road. It will be there when EWR opens and be in active use, but will be removed when the HS2 work is completed.

 

[The Planner]

The 4 track section is all at Calvert, and is a temporary railhead for HS2, which will allow them to deliver materials for HS2 and the infrastructure depot by rail, keeping lorries off the road. It will be there when EWR opens and be in active use, but will be removed when the HS2 work is completed.

The stub to the HS2 IMD will go, the Claydon Loops themselves are permanent.

 

[swt_passenger]

I recall seeing an earlier photo where they ran new track through just such an arch (!the third arch ) although I cannot recall the location.

It’s at Whaddon Road bridge, just west of Newton Longville, where they ran the down (eastbound) line through the third arch on the north side. That arch’s sidewall had previously been altered to allow access to sidings.

 

[EIKN]

During the EWR TWAO public inquiry I asked a couple of questions about this.
Questions and responses from NR below. From Inquiry Doc NR 211

3. The cost of replacing those existing bridges between Bicester and Bletchley
that would need to be replaced/subject to some works to enable electrification
but which are not currently proposed to be replaced?

There are 5 structures along this route which would require partial or complete
demolition followed by replacement with new structures to provide for future
electrification. The total cost to the project of these works would be
approximately £34.5m.


4. The cost difference between works to those bridges before EWR2 becomes
operational as compared to after it has become operational?

The total cost of the above works once EWR2 has become operational would be
approximately £41.8m. This means that the difference in cost between doing the
works before EWR2 becomes operational and afterwards is approximately £7.3m.

The new leven line was supposed to be wired , and has piling works and foundations for masts installed on most of the route , so when they do start wiring it the job will be easier , however it's similar to Ewr in that they have not done any works on at least three bridges , in fact I posted a question on the Facebook group about that asking why , most of the bridges had received works including repainting to write the rusted shabby bridges to a good standard, it was then explained that the bridges either belong to a private company , I can't recall exactly , but anyway the SNP as stated yesterday on Google news that the wiring works are ' paused ', the same article gave a mention to EWR , stating that most of it is ready for wiring , but as you say some bridges are not , they the. Some about using longer distances between masts with a stronger contact wire I guess. , but also someone posted that like the GWR wiring of the great western route there are one or two places like bridges where there is a gap in the wiring and that trains would ' coast between these sections ' now I may have that wrong but I thought that I actually had read in various rail magazines at the time that this was done .
So if it can be done and it wouldn't cause a moving train to come to a halt , would it not be cheaper to do this on EWR rather than do much to the bridges that are unfit for wiring , beyond raising their walls above ( the borders railway was future proofed for wiring , and bridges got higher walls that would make it difficult to do a ybtrain spotting from such bridges ( of course unless you had a ladder, )as the new stones added , are about 5ft tall, anyway I hope this makes sense , my apologies if it doesn't I suffer bad brain fog due to my health , and thus I'm trying to remember, what I've read about various wiring schemes .
But I'm sure that as I say that the wiring of the great western line has gaps instead of changing bridges , with the point being , if this is possible to be workable , then would it not reduce the costs of wiring the route in future ?.

One question I forgot to ask in my last post was , what is the current setup, with where the first phase of EWR that was built I think 2015 perhaps, when they opened the new biscter station , I know that part of the track there Joins the line or they said a new line to join the route to I think Marylebone ? The only non wired station in London .
( Also if they do wire EWR surely they'd wire to there as well) anyway the question is are there buffer stops at the moment at Biscter as that is the end of the recent new build or reopened section of this line ? My apologies for so many questions, but being so far away it's hard to visualise how it all links up, I do know that they have the go-ahead to reopen the branch line from Cowley to Oxford that they said will link to EWR , I gather works start soon there,, so will that be part of EWR ( like that link planned I think they said to Aylesbury?).
Finally moving further east to the Marston bake section, which I guess once this phase opens will be all part of EWR , with stations being moved and rationed , won't there be a lot of work needed there for wiring the line , bearing in mind that apparently some time shortly they are adding a couple of loops to that section .
And also if this phase with the the new arrangement at Bletchley , I take it this means that EWR will run to Bedford ?
And also someone had posted about how many train services would run in EWR but given it links back to Oxford then perhaps GWR can run services along EWR using 5 car IET's.

 

[12LDA28C]

It’s only the Aylesbury link that will actually run alongside HS2, that’s if they ever get round to building it. Thats roughly from Calvert to the former Quainton closed station, where the lines diverge again. The formation for the future Aylesbury curve is being made ready, it’s on the left in the tenth photo, roughly alongside the crossover, looking west. Currently the relevant points and signalling are not being fitted.

It's not in doubt that the line from Quainton to Calvert will be relaid as it needs to be reinstated for rail traffic to serve Calvert Household Waste Disposal site. The only question remains as to whether this line will see the curve reinstated to link the Aylesbury line with EWR, as you say the formation will be prepared just in case it gets approved in the future.

The 4 track section is all at Calvert,

It's not. The 4-track section is at Claydon, as described. Calvert is around a mile further south.

 

[swt_passenger]

... Some about using longer distances between masts with a stronger contact wire I guess, but also someone posted that like the GWR wiring of the great western route there are one or two places like bridges where there is a gap in the wiring and that trains would ' coast between these sections ' now I may have that wrong but I thought that I actually had read in various rail magazines at the time that this was done .

But I'm sure that as I say that the wiring of the great western line has gaps instead of changing bridges , with the point being , if this is possible to be workable , then would it not reduce the costs of wiring the route in future ?.

I don’t believe any of that ever happened. Coasting was discussed for Steventon, west of Didcot, but they eventually got away with a slight speed restriction. It wasn’t ever a gap in the wire, more a long neutral section, causing a gap in the power.

One question I forgot to ask in my last post was , what is the current setup, with where the first phase of EWR that was built I think 2015 perhaps, when they opened the new biscter station , I know that part of the track there Joins the line or they said a new line to join the route to I think Marylebone ? The only non wired station in London .

The route east of Bicester divides at Gavray Junction, two new tracks head south towards the Chiltern mainline, and the original track (now doubled) carries on straight as it always did towards EWR, and it is functional enough for engineering trains to arrive and depart, but it’s under engineering possession. I‘d assume there are usually stop boards in position, but no buffers.

And also someone had posted about how many train services would run in EWR but given it links back to Oxford then perhaps GWR can run services along EWR using 5 car IET's.

Chiltern will run the initial service using DMUs. Despite much forum conjecture there are no current plans to run anything EWR across Oxford.

 

[12LDA28C]

One question I forgot to ask in my last post was , what is the current setup, with where the first phase of EWR that was built I think 2015 perhaps, when they opened the new biscter station , I know that part of the track there Joins the line or they said a new line to join the route to I think Marylebone ? The only non wired station in London .
( Also if they do wire EWR surely they'd wire to there as well) anyway the question is are there buffer stops at the moment at Biscter as that is the end of the recent new build or reopened section of this line ?

The western end of EWR between Bicester Village and Oxford is in use for services between Oxford and Marylebone which 'turn off' from EWR at Gavray junction to use the Bicester South West Chord to reach the Chiltern main line. There are no buffer stops in place at Bicester Village and nor does there need to be.

There are no plans currently to electrify EWR, due to the original plan being de-scoped to save money.

 

[jfowkes]

the same article gave a mention to EWR , stating that most of it is ready for wiring , but as you say some bridges are not , they the. Some about using longer distances between masts with a stronger contact wire I guess. , but also someone posted that like the GWR wiring of the great western route there are one or two places like bridges where there is a gap in the wiring and that trains would ' coast between these sections ' now I may have that wrong but I thought that I actually had read in various rail magazines at the time that this was done .
So if it can be done and it wouldn't cause a moving train to come to a halt , would it not be cheaper to do this on EWR rather than do much to the bridges that are unfit for wiring , beyond raising their walls above ( the borders railway was future proofed for wiring , and bridges got higher walls that would make it difficult to do a ybtrain spotting from such bridges ( of course unless you had a ladder, )as the new stones added , are about 5ft tall, anyway I hope this makes sense , my apologies if it doesn't I suffer bad brain fog due to my health , and thus I'm trying to remember, what I've read about various wiring schemes .
But I'm sure that as I say that the wiring of the great western line has gaps instead of changing bridges , with the point being , if this is possible to be workable , then would it not reduce the costs of wiring the route in future ?.

What you are describing is under the category of "discontinuous electrification", essentially inserting gaps or earthed sections into the contact wire where it passed underneath obstacles. Because there is no energised wire at those points, you don't have to have the same electrical clearances (but note: with earthed sections, there's still mechanical clearance to consider)

However, this doesn't necessarily make it a good option compared to a bridge rebuild. There are major costs associated with gaps/earthed sections (see this excellent thread from @25kv on twitter):

1. You still need some sort of conductor running from one side of the obstacle to the other, assuming the other side doesn't have a substation. So that high-current, high-voltage wire needs to run somewhere else, probably in a trough on the surface. Making this reliable and safe costs money.
2. If you have a gap, you need to have a system that ensure the pantograph is lowered or it'll hit the bridge. These systems need to ensure the "lower pan" signal is issued in sufficient time that if it fails to lower, the train can stop from line speed before the impact point. This means a very long gap.
3. If you have gap, the train has no power. That's no power to keep the speed up, no power for passengers, no power for catering, no power for A/C etc.
4. If you have gap, the train has no power. If the train stops for any reason, it can't get itself out (unless it's bi/tri-mode). Which also rules out this option at stations, or at signals that can display a danger aspect.
5. If you have a earthed section, points 3 and 4 also apply.
6. If you have a earthed section, you need neutral sections too, to prevent pantograph arcing. This adds cost, complexity and length to the section.

 

[The Planner]

It's not in doubt that the line from Quainton to Calvert will be relaid as it needs to be reinstated for rail traffic to serve Calvert Household Waste Disposal site. The only question remains as to whether this line will see the curve reinstated to link the Aylesbury line with EWR, as you say the formation will be prepared just in case it gets approved in the future.

Its happening.

 

[swt_passenger]

Its happening.

The curve to EWR?

 

[The Planner]

The curve to EWR?

Yes. After EW opens, but its going in.

 

[swt_passenger]

Yes. After EW opens, but its going in.

Great. That puts to bed about 3 years of discussion…

 

[jfowkes]

But I'm sure that as I say that the wiring of the great western line has gaps instead of changing bridges , with the point being , if this is possible to be workable , then would it not reduce the costs of wiring the route in future ?.

I don't think the Great Western has discontinuous electrification in the sense of regular non-electrified gaps in the OLE. There are points where the OLE stops and there are automatic-power-changeover (APCO) systems that the bi-mode trains to switch to/from the OLE in those locations. But I don't believe there's any locations where discontinuous electrification was used to avoid bridge rebuilds.

There was the specific case of Steventon Bridge, where OLE was installed without a rebuild. Due to a nearby level crossing, this meant the contact wire height changed a lot over a short distance. This meant a speed reduction to 60mph for pure-EMUs (due to the dynamics of how changing wire height works) and an APCO installation for bi-modes. This wasn't acceptable long-term, so NR did a lot of testing, slowly increasing the speed through the section, until they were confident that a speed of 110mph was safe at this location. Because of the increased contact forces here, there needs to be more monitoring of the OLE for wear and movement. So, it was a technically interesting project, and a testament to how good modern OLE systems are. But if they'd just rebuilt the bridge to begin with, you would have avoided 1) installing an APCO system 2) reducing linespeed from 125 to 60mph 3) an expensive set of experiments 4) a permanent linespeed restriction to 110mph 5) ongoing enhanced monitoring. I'm not in a position to judge whether that is a good trade-off or not, but my feeling is: no.

 

[hwl]

Great. That puts to bed about 3 years of discussion…

The issue was always that it would give HS2 construction logistic issues unless it was delay until several years after Bicester - Bletchley opening but given HS2 record on construction timings in Buckinghamshire not politician would ever trust potential opening dates to make promise especially as it would be middle of the next parliament at the earliest.

 

[12LDA28C]

Yes. After EW opens, but its going in.

If that's true, it's pretty shortsighted to lay plain line for EWR and not put the pointwork in for the junction now, rather than install it later at increased cost and no doubt disruption to services.

 

[The Planner]

If that's true, it's pretty shortsighted to lay plain line for EWR and not put the pointwork in for the junction now, rather than install it later at increased cost and no doubt disruption to services.

You cannot leave S&C in that long with it not being in use. You could install those turnouts in a Christmas shut down anyway.

 

[Elecman]

You cannot leave S&C in that long with it not being in use. You could install those turnouts in a Christmas shut down anyway.

Quite !!

 

[12LDA28C]

You cannot leave S&C in that long with it not being in use. You could install those turnouts in a Christmas shut down anyway.

Fair enough. Would it not have made sense to put the curve in now so engineering trains could access the Aylesbury line from EWR for when the track gets reinstated? I assume as long as power supplies, point motors etc were installed and the switches were tested / maintained as necessary that would be sufficient.

 

[The Planner]

Fair enough. Would it not have made sense to put the curve in now so engineering trains could access the Aylesbury line from EWR for when the track gets reinstated? I assume as long as power supplies, point motors etc were installed and the switches were tested / maintained as necessary that would be sufficient.

Neither here nor there, you can feed any engineering trains in from the south.

 

[hwl]

Fair enough. Would it not have made sense to put the curve in now so engineering trains could access the Aylesbury line from EWR for when the track gets reinstated? I assume as long as power supplies, point motors etc were installed and the switches were tested / maintained as necessary that would be sufficient.

HS2 are using area starting from the southern bit of the curve to Quainton as a logistics haul route for the next few years and track would get in the way. The Quainton end is far more likely to be accessible first for relaying.

 

[EIKN]

Thank you for all the replies it's very interesting to read , although I do not profess to funky understand the technical sides , but that description of the experiment from lowering mine speeds only to slowly increase them , means they should have if possible or workable , lowered the track , I guess that eoukd have been cheaper, but not sure if that would have been possible.
Really as was said they should have just altered it re built the bridge , and for aesthetic reasons in countryside they could have built a modern structure and refaced it with the old dressed stone work , to blend in better , than some motorway style modern bridge . Like they have at Leven with the Bawbee bridge.

Also this curve people are discussing , is this for the proposed link to Aylesbury or wherever it was supposed to reach .
As for GWR there was actually a mention in one of the railway magazines that ran an article on EWR , then again recently about the various new open access operators and new train routes , and there was mention of GWR trains running west from Oxford toward Milton Keynes .
After all the EWR services , are using cascaded or loaned 6 car 196's I think they are , I'd need to check , but if they are not running many services a day, it seems a missed opportunity to provide competitive services , that would give rail users more choice , simarly when it is eventually joined up to the greater Anglia region they took could extend their services westward toward Bedford for example , EWR is a pretty big project and probably one of the longest reopenings of all.
The fact it crosses the West coast mainline , midland mainline and ECML ought to give plenty of scope for extra services .
One thing that isn't being mentioned is will they allow freight trains to run, as this would help alleviate traffic on the roads , even though they are supposed to be upgrading roads .
The aim of government seems to be to get as many people on public transport as possible..this is clearly seen and was in the magazine article about the number of new stations being opened this year alone and last year or perhaps Chiltern could run it's Intercity services along there .
Other wise this expensive project is going to be very under utilised .
And that wasn't the aim when they decided to build it.