Chiltern Evergreen 4?

Status
Not open for further replies.

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,541
Sorry - would have bumped this thread with a post but it's closed:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=30788

Is there any news on the proposed Evergreen 4? As the Evergreens all occurred before DB Rail, do we even think they will continue?

What do people think would be viable? Some guesses:
  • Complete doubling of Bicester - Oxford route
  • Extension from Aylesbury VP to Bletchley/Milton Keynes
  • North-facing bays at High Wycombe to have more local services/shuttles connecting into faster trains - for example slows to Oxford, Aylesbury and maybe beyond as above to MK?
  • Linespeed improvements between Warwick and Stratford?
  • More passing loops and quadding at stations on the mainline

Long shots:
Electrification to Birmingham and Oxford
Take over Met line from Moor Park - Chesham/Amersham (combined with Croxley link!)
Recommission tunnels out of Marylebone up towards Finchley Road
Central line extension to Denham or Uxbridge. Chiltern calls dropped along this stretch.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

YorkshireBear

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
7,940
Was the guy from chiltern who just retired behind them? that may also have influenc on future evergreen projects.
 

thefab444

Established Member
Joined
27 Oct 2006
Messages
3,691
Location
The New Forest
Haven't DB tried to back out of the funding for Evergreen 3 as it was seen to be too risky? I think it's unlikely there'll be an Evergreen 4 but I'd love to be proved wrong.

Extension from Aylesbury Vale/Oxford to Milton Keynes has got to be my favourite from that list.
 

TDK

Established Member
Joined
19 Apr 2008
Messages
4,126
Location
Wrexham
sorry - would have bumped this thread with a post but it's closed:

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=30788

is there any news on the proposed evergreen 4? As the evergreens all occurred before db rail, do we even think they will continue?

What do people think would be viable? Some guesses:
  • complete doubling of bicester - oxford route
  • extension from aylesbury vp to bletchley/milton keynes
  • north-facing bays at high wycombe to have more local services/shuttles connecting into faster trains - for example slows to oxford, aylesbury and maybe beyond as above to mk?
  • linespeed improvements between warwick and stratford?
  • more passing loops and quadding at stations on the mainline

long shots:
Electrification to birmingham and oxford
take over met line from moor park - chesham/amersham (combined with croxley link!)
recommission tunnels out of marylebone up towards finchley road
central line extension to denham or uxbridge. Chiltern calls dropped along this stretch.

eg4 = hs2
 

PinzaC55

Member
Joined
6 Sep 2010
Messages
548
When they have schemes like this why do they insist on giving them silly names like "Evergreen"? It tells you nothing about the project and just sounds like an old people's retirement home or a brand of lawn food.
 

NIMBUS

Member
Joined
13 May 2011
Messages
176
wonder if they have to get Network Rail in to sort this one out for them also!:oops:

Come on, be fair. It was the demise of Jarvis, with all the contracts that were due to be completed by them, that screwed the timescales on Evergreen 3.
 

RPM

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2009
Messages
1,389
Location
Buckinghamshire
When they have schemes like this why do they insist on giving them silly names like "Evergreen"? It tells you nothing about the project and just sounds like an old people's retirement home or a brand of lawn food.

The name "Evergreen" derives from a concept put forward by Chiltern many years ago whereby they would hold on to the franchise in perpetuity in return for meeting targets and investing in major infrastructure projects along the way. In the event the SRA didn't see it quite like that but the name stuck.
 

PinzaC55

Member
Joined
6 Sep 2010
Messages
548
The name "Evergreen" derives from a concept put forward by Chiltern many years ago whereby they would hold on to the franchise in perpetuity in return for meeting targets and investing in major infrastructure projects along the way. In the event the SRA didn't see it quite like that but the name stuck.

Maybe they should rename it "Pwned" then?
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,541
Maybe as long as they are profitable, DB will let them exist as they did?

I'll be interested to see how Water Eaton fares.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
11,074
Water Eaton will make a killing and be a victim of it's own success. Getting into Oxford is awful at the best of times so the ability to go, park and jump on a train and be in London in the best part of an hour will be a big draw. I doubt if the car parking capacity will cope.
 

RPM

Established Member
Joined
24 Sep 2009
Messages
1,389
Location
Buckinghamshire
Extension from Aylesbury Vale/Oxford to Milton Keynes has got to be my favourite from that list.


Unfortunately that isn't reckoned to be a commercial proposition. If it does ever happen it will have to be funded some other way.

Personally I think the post Evergreen 3 Chiltern Main Line will suffer from insufficient flexibility when the timetable gets out of kilter so my guess is that Evergreen 4 will be a relatively modest capacity/flexibility upgrade incorporating some of the items that were cut out of the Evergreen 3 project when they were trimming it to make it affordable. For example:

- The south facing bay platforms at Bicester North and Gerrards Cross.
- The bidirectional fast line at Denham.
- The lengthening of South Ruislip loop at the north end to shorten the conflicting moves that freight trains heading onto the Paddington line will have to make post Evergreen 3.
- Possible reduction of the single track sections of the Oxford line.

All speculation though!
 

Buttsy

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2011
Messages
1,360
Location
Oxford
I understand that the doubling of Oxford - Bicester would occur if East - West link happens and this now seems to be being pushed as the whole scheme rather than just the straightforward idea of stage by stage (Oxford - MK, MK - Bedford, Bedford - Hitchin, Hitchin - Cambridge).
 

mr_jrt

Established Member
Joined
30 May 2011
Messages
1,159
I always thought that extending the Crossrail terminators up the Chiltern mainline from OOC (rather than the WCML, which is what they're now proposing) was a no-brainer, and would be a great instigator of electrifying the suburban services out to High Wycombe, whilst also substantially relieving Marylebone.

I agree Aylesbury to MK is also a good option, as would a Aylesbury to Watford Junction service (St. Albans would be even better if they could stretch to a dive under).
 

Chris B

Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
185
East-West will still happen (when it does) in those three tranches....

THere is no planned EG4 - EG3 (including Oxford-MYB) is the last of the projects agreed under this franchise.

So EG4 will form part of Chiltern's bid for 2021. It'll need to be good & large, to win the franchise, I reckon.
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
5,771
Location
South Wales
East-West will still happen (when it does) in those three tranches....

THere is no planned EG4 - EG3 (including Oxford-MYB) is the last of the projects agreed under this franchise.

So EG4 will form part of Chiltern's bid for 2021. It'll need to be good & large, to win the franchise, I reckon.

here is a suggestion wire the Marylebone - Aylesbury route and displace the class 165's to boost capacity elsewhere on the chiltern railways network.
 

NIMBUS

Member
Joined
13 May 2011
Messages
176
Dunno what LUL would say about Network Rail putting wires over about 20 miles of the Met line!

I still think that it was a great shame that Harrow to Amersham/Chesham was not transferred to Network Rail years ago, leaving the Met with the Uxbridge and Watford branches, running parallel (in the case of the latter) but unconnected. Some proper investment in upgrading the track and signalling is desperately needed.

In NSE days there was the promise of around 47-minute Aylesbury to Marylebone times (fastest is still 54 minutes) but the sub-standard maintenance of the Met section has always precluded being able to run at anything like main line speeds. It's probably one of the reasons why Chiltern appear to have given up on any improvements on that route.
 

barrykas

Established Member
Joined
19 Sep 2006
Messages
1,579
In NSE days there was the promise of around 47-minute Aylesbury to Marylebone times (fastest is still 54 minutes) but the sub-standard maintenance of the Met section has always precluded being able to run at anything like main line speeds. It's probably one of the reasons why Chiltern appear to have given up on any improvements on that route.
It'll be interesting to see what happens to the Aylesbury services when the new signalling goes in on the Met, given I doubt LU will pay for any mods that may be required to the Chiltern fleet...and I can't see the unions accepting any suggestion of running the Chilterns under ATO, even if the kit were available.

Cheers,

Barry
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,541
I still think that it was a great shame that Harrow to Amersham/Chesham was not transferred to Network Rail years ago, leaving the Met with the Uxbridge and Watford branches, running parallel (in the case of the latter) but unconnected. Some proper investment in upgrading the track and signalling is desperately needed.

In NSE days there was the promise of around 47-minute Aylesbury to Marylebone times (fastest is still 54 minutes) but the sub-standard maintenance of the Met section has always precluded being able to run at anything like main line speeds. It's probably one of the reasons why Chiltern appear to have given up on any improvements on that route.

A lot of people drive to either Tring or Berkhamstead, or to Beaconsfield, depending on where they are on that route - as the service and journey times are better. The Aylesbury line has massive potential if improved to a decent standard.
 

Metroman62

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2011
Messages
103
Location
Amersham
A lot of people drive to either Tring or Berkhamstead, or to Beaconsfield, depending on where they are on that route - as the service and journey times are better. The Aylesbury line has massive potential if improved to a decent standard.

The idea of giving Chiltern the Met North of Harrow / Moor Park I think would only work if they could increase the number of trains into Marylebone. I think they would need to provide an extra 2 trains an hour to cover the Met services, but is their capacity for this? When they proposed to close Marylebone in the 1980s, one of the reasons why they did not was because Baker Street could not take the extra services, so it may work the other way too.

Also, many Met users prefer the easy ride into the City and connections with the Jubilee at Finchly Road, rather than having to change at Marylebone, so there is demand for Met services north of Moor Park.

What would be useful (I think) is if Chiltern pressed for the West Hampstead interchange station. A station providing easy changes between Chiltern, Met, Jubilee, North London Line and Thameslink at West Hampsetad. All these lines are very close together making a decent interchange station "relatively" easy to create. I know there have been proposals for years and the area could do with development.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,541
I think the West Hampstead thing is a good idea, but there wouldn't be room for all three. So I would forego the Met line and connect to the Jubilee. You'd only need a very simple island platform there for Chiltern.

The Jubilee platform is wider than it needs to be, so that might need to be part of it - to scoot everything to the right!
 

Metroman62

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2011
Messages
103
Location
Amersham
I think the West Hampstead thing is a good idea, but there wouldn't be room for all three.

I think I saw some years ago the plan was to move all the lines over to the east (ish) using land formerly used by a dairy and currently used by a car place. This would also involve altering the road and buildings above, but would bring all the lines closer together making a decent safe interchange, much better than the limited inter change now which involves crossing West end Lane on foot.
 

Chris B

Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
185
If they can find it commercially viable to build an office block over the tiop, I do think this could still happen. But the economy needs to pick up big time first.
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,541
They're almost finished rebuilding the Thameslink station, no way would they move it to the other side of West End Lane.

I could see the Jubilee, Met and Chiltern on the northern side (then all stations would be) - you'd lose the turnback though but Willesden Green should suffice.

You could use that weird car rental/limo hire yard for a combined station with the Overground. And then an underground foot tunnel would be much easier.
 

Metrailway

Member
Joined
1 Jun 2011
Messages
575
Location
Birmingham/Coventry/London
What would be useful (I think) is if Chiltern pressed for the West Hampstead interchange station. A station providing easy changes between Chiltern, Met, Jubilee, North London Line and Thameslink at West Hampsetad. All these lines are very close together making a decent interchange station "relatively" easy to create. I know there have been proposals for years and the area could do with development.

Although it would be a good interchange, I think that most Chiltern services wouldn't call there. Your 2tph to Brum, 2tph to Oxford, 1tph to Bicester/Stratford, 1tph to Aylesbury via High Wycombe wouldn't call there since these are (semi-) fasts. The 2tph to Aylesbury via Met could stop, but wouldn't benefit a huge number of people since they have the option of using the Met. This leaves the 2tph local to Gerrards Cross and 1tph local to West Ruislip only calling here. Making some trains stop, while the rest don't, limits the capacity on the this section of track.

Note: These frequencies come from the proposed Chiltern timetable after the completion of Evergreen 3 published in 2009.
 

Chris B

Member
Joined
28 May 2008
Messages
185
Hmmm - I think there would be high customer pressure *to* stop there. Whether Chiltern would resist?.....
 

cle

Established Member
Joined
17 Nov 2010
Messages
2,541
I think it's be easiest for everything to stop. Linespeed isn't high here so you wouldn't lose too much, and capacity wise everything stopping is ok. There's not really any freight yet.

I think it'd be almost as popular as Marylebone frankly. The connections would be excellent - not least Thameslink to the airports and City, and Jubilee to Canary Wharf.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top