The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 16,048
Long been saying that getting to MK is causing a bit of angst in terms of the timetable, hence the words used in the press release.
Bedford was always going to be rebuilt, and it doesn't even have to be that dramatic (though I'd like to see proper fast line platforms).EDIT - looking at the EastWest website I see connection phase 2 (Bletchley to Bedford) will require the complete rebuilding of Bedford Station to achieve. They appear to have also discovered that there is no room to terminate additonal trains at Bedford in the peak hours, when the station is crawling with Thameslink trains and two stoppers an hour run to Bletchley. Whoops.
The plan for the up fast line is to put crossovers direct from the up fast to Platform 3 either end of the platform, ending the current practice where trains calling at Bedford spend about 3 miles grinding aroud on the slow lines and their crossovers between Bedford N and S Junctions. Or at least it was.Bedford was always going to be rebuilt, and it doesn't even have to be that dramatic (though I'd like to see proper fast line platforms).
The existing building is going to go and 1a extended. That will give EWR a full length platform, and likely, access directly to the EMU siding beyond. If Thameslink can be a bit more efficient with their platform usage, the EWR could potentially have exclusive use of both 1a & 1, if Thameslink can manage with just 2 & 3. Maybe a siding north of the station would help, or as mooted elsewhere, maybe moving the turnback to a new station north of Bedford where there's a bit more space might be a good idea.
They are also potentiay deferring the Bletchley-MK bit. Bedford to Bletchley was supposed to be extended to MK when Bletchley was resignalled but hasn't been as there are no paths.
Pound to a pinch of the proverbial that what you will actually get is an hourly Oxford to Bedford service that calls at all stations east of Bletchley followed by the smaller stations on the line being reduced to little more than a parliamentary service over the next few years and the Cambridge bit canned when post Covid economic reality hits.
Hopefully not operated with tarted up District Line trains but it wouldn't entirely surprise me.
Not that I'm cynical or anything.
EDIT - looking at the EastWest website I see connection phase 2 (Bletchley to Bedford) will require the complete rebuilding of Bedford Station to achieve. They appear to have also discovered that there is no room to terminate additonal trains at Bedford in the peak hours, when the station is crawling with Thameslink trains and two stoppers an hour run to Bletchley. Whoops.
Why on earth would you run an extra service from Leeds to Bedford post HS2 rather than extending one of the existing two an hour St Pan to Sheffied to Leeds and adding calls at places like Bedford?Also that the bay was built for Marston, but the extension was never finalized.
Is the issue platforms at MKC? Surely the pathing isn't that tricky - only 5tph or so between Bletchley and MKC, and it's a short enough run that the diesels won't be caught up. I suspect the Southern will need curtailing further south (even Bletchley) or a service or two will need to rnu on from MKC to Northampton. Maybe the one from Oxford?
The Bedford rebuild plan has always been quite murky. I don't think anybody wants to face the reality yet. There is a plan, if HS2/Toton goes ahead, to run a Leeds service beginning at Bedford. I have no idea how that would work/turn around, let alone the new EWR service. With Marston slows remaining at 1tph also.
You could also get a loop on the other side of the down fast platform without too much difficulty, not sure it would achieve much though, altbough perhaps might be handy for freight.
Ask yourself why the Marston Vale doesn't run to MK.Is the issue platforms at MKC? Surely the pathing isn't that tricky - only 5tph or so between Bletchley and MKC, and it's a short enough run that the diesels won't be caught up. I suspect the Southern will need curtailing further south (even Bletchley) or a service or two will need to rnu on from MKC to Northampton. Maybe the one from Oxford?
You would be surprised how often the freights get switched from Slow to Fast at Flitwick or Bedford South junction then back onto the slows at Bedford North or further up, often done ad hoc rather than planned working I suspect.Very little freight on the fast lines.
The Southern in the platform? Or nobody cares enough to make the change.Ask yourself why the Marston Vale doesn't run to MK.
EDIT - looking at the EastWest website I see connection phase 2 (Bletchley to Bedford) will require the complete rebuilding of Bedford Station to achieve. They appear to have also discovered that there is no room to terminate additonal trains at Bedford in the peak hours, when the station is crawling with Thameslink trains and two stoppers an hour run to Bletchley. Whoops.
The Southern in the platform?
Surely this is intrinsic to EWR being a success at all. Otherwise, everything terminates at Bletchley? Seems a little random for the future and for the whole hoopla this was a few years back, vs what it's currently shaping up to be (1 diesel tph Oxford to Bedford).
You would be surprised how often the freights get switched from Slow to Fast at Flitwick or Bedford South junction then back onto the slows at Bedford North or further up, often done ad hoc rather than planned working I suspect.
There is no path for the Marston Vale train on the pre-COVID timetable where it sat, I will never find the post now but I went through it a while back explaining the issues.The Southern in the platform? Or nobody cares enough to make the change.
Finding a path at Bletchley to run 5-6 mins can't be too difficult, given you can wait there easily.
Surely this is intrinsic to EWR being a success at all. Otherwise, everything terminates at Bletchley? Seems a little random for the future and for the whole hoopla this was a few years back, vs what it's currently shaping up to be (1 diesel tph Oxford to Bedford).
There is no path for the Marston Vale train on the pre-COVID timetable where it sat, I will never find the post now but I went through it a while back explaining the issues.
If we see a permanent reduction in service post Covid on the London Midland "Silverlink" service from London, I think we can be sure that BBRUA will be all over it like a rash to get the Bedford service extended to MK.There is no path for the Marston Vale train on the pre-COVID timetable where it sat, I will never find the post now but I went through it a while back explaining the issues.
Yes I don't buy the excuse that they may have to terminate at Bletchley to prove reliability that far, before extending.Long been saying that getting to MK is causing a bit of angst in terms of the timetable, hence the words used in the press release.
Ask yourself why the Marston Vale doesn't run to MK.
If we see a permanent reduction in service post Covid on the London Midland "Silverlink" service from London, I think we can be sure that BBRUA will be all over it like a rash to get the Bedford service extended to MK.
Similarly, anyone with ideas of cutting services to the smaller stations will face the wrath of the BBRUA.
They are one of the longest standing and most committed rail user groups, without whom the line would have shut and certainly would not have been extended from St Johns to Bedford Midland, which was an immense achievement.
I'm sure you are right. The railway industry is a past master at coming up with all sorts of reasons why something supposedly CANNOT be done when in fact the real reason is they don't want to do it because it will make their working life a bit more difficult or they would rather focus on something else.To troll me?
I know it is tight on capacity but I am convinced it could be accommodated with the required will/sponsorship/driver - however no such will exists at this point in time
You underestimate the BBRUA at your peril.Not sure I follow your logic - if the LNW services are reduced post Covid, I'm not sure that Marston Vale services being improved will be justified either though......
Not sure I follow your logic - if the LNW services are reduced post Covid, I'm not sure that Marston Vale services being improved will be justified either though......
Was the original business case for East-West rail based on the assumption that services would go to Milton Keynes?
And what happens to that business case if it proves impossible to fit it in to the WCML timetable?
That chord, is that between Flyover Junction Summit and the Marston Vale branchline?The article states Bicester to Bletchley not Bicester to Bedford, but is on the subject of re-opening closed lines and Bletchley to Bedford line is operational. But there appears to be a funding cut, which sort of indicates there is no money for Bletchley to Bedford. Just thinking whether the substantial refurb costs of Bletchley flyover are being borne by NR and not EWR. The construction cost of Bletchley HL station will be borne by EWR. So it looks as if initial running will be Oxford to MK with the single line chord re-instated between Bletchley HL and Fenny Stratford? Have to wait for more details from EWR.
Rebuilding Oxford station a separate and costly project.
Also, has the option been looked at of adding a fifth track to the WCML between Milton Keynes and Bletchley? From Google satellite view, the existing railway land seems wide enough to accommodate 5 tracks south from Milton Keynes to the road H7. And also from just south of Watling St to Bletchley station. So the gap that would need widening is from H7 to the Watling St, a distance of 1.2 miles. Not far at all, but several major bridges would need widening, so I don't know how practical that would be?
I'd estimate that about 35 people need Kempston Hardwick.The very small stations between Bletchley and Bedford should be closed to speed up the line and journeys on it. No-one needs Kempston Hardwick station.
I'd estimate that about 35 people need Kempston Hardwick.
I'm not sure if it would be that disruptive, actually. The bridges over V4 Watling St and the A5 would be long girders, and there seems to be plenty of room to build the abutments without blocking the main lines. And Bridge H7 Chaffron Way has already been built wide enough! See here:There's certainly room for it (probably even 6-track if you wanted) but it would be extraordinarily expensive and disruptive due to the large number of bridges. Even room for another full-size island platform at MKC if you wanted