East-West Rail (EWR): Consultation updates [not speculation]

[zwk500]

The north chord has moved from crayons to proper engineering pens from what I hear.

It's the accountant's pencils I think will be the bigger hurdle to clear.

 

[Tobbes]

The north chord has moved from crayons to proper engineering pens from what I hear.

Excellent news! I couldn't believe that they wouldn't at least have a fully worked up proposition for this.

 

[a good off]

The north chord has moved from crayons to proper engineering pens from what I hear.

I’ve heard the same.

 

[richieb1971]

Why was the Bletchley flyover redone? Trains went over it every now and again as it was before at a slow speed, nothing in that area would have travelled at speed. It makes you wonder if the project would have gotten anywhere without its pre existing status and now they are redoing a lot it.

 

[Tobbes]

Why was the Bletchley flyover redone? Trains went over it every now and again as it was before at a slow speed, nothing in that area would have travelled at speed. It makes you wonder if the project would have gotten anywhere without its pre existing status and now they are redoing a lot it.

The flyover was in worse shape than was understood- IIRC, the steel reinforcing had rusted, and this meant it was better value for money to remove and replace than to cure.

 

[hwl]

The flyover was in worse shape than was understood- IIRC, the steel reinforcing had rusted, and this meant it was better value for money to remove and replace than to cure.

Incorrect.

As covered at least 4 times I can remember in the 160 pages, the issue is (or rather was!) the bearings (mainly where the support structure was not perpendicular to the track - main similar road bridges and viaducts pre mid 1980's also have bearing issues some also have rusting rebar too but not Bletchely).
Some of the parapet wasn't in great shape but that was relatively minor overall.

Two Options were examined:
a) jacking 2 deck sections at a time and replacing a bearing (so each deck section got lifted twice, once for each end)
b) a new structure

They went with the option b) which while more expensive up front had lower maintenance costs long term so was the best overall option.

 

[gallafent]

the issue is (or rather was!) the bearings (mainly where the support structure was not perpendicular to the track - main similar road bridges and viaducts pre mid 1980's also have bearing issues some also have rusting rebar too but not Bletchely)

With apologies for going slightly away from EaWeRa (happy to spin out into another thread, since this one is closed), this is also the problem which has affected the road bridge over the railway at Kennington (just south of Oxford):

Oxfordshire County Council update

Following several detailed inspections of a bridge that forms part of the A423 at Kennington (Southern Bypass) we have identified the need to replace the structure. This is based upon the initial poor design of the structure and the effects of weathering on the bearings that support it.

[…]

Reconstruction of the bridge is due to begin in 2023 and should be completed by the end of 2025, due to the complexities of the surrounding utility constraints in particular. There are overhead mains electricity cables above the bridge, a Thames Water mains pipe incorporated into the structure, and four lanes of Network Rail train tracks below, as well as two streams (these are tributaries of the River Thames and are classified as main rivers).

[…]

It seems the process has been quite similar in both cases — the discovery that the problem is with the bearings meaning that what had originally been planned to be some “maintenance and running repairs” actually turns into “replacement”.

 

[hwl]

With apologies for going slightly away from EaWeRa (happy to spin out into another thread, since this one is closed), this is also the problem which has affected the road bridge over the railway at Kennington (just south of Oxford):

Oxfordshire County Council update


[…]

[…]

It seems the process has been quite similar in both cases — the discovery that the problem is with the bearings meaning that what had originally been planned to be some “maintenance and running repairs” actually turns into “replacement”.

That was actually one of the problem road bridges I was thinking of! There are hundreds of road bridges /viaducts but a large number sit with Highways England etc. (who are less surprised by major works e.g. bearing replacement or replacing the whole lot) rather local authorities who always seem to get "surprised".

 

[ewrfan]

Tories hit out at ‘political’ vote which exposed group’s division on East West Rail route controversy - Bedford Independent

Bedford Council’s Conservative leader slammed the Liberal Democrats for gutter politics over taking a recorded vote on the...

www.bedfordindependent.co.uk

Made front line news on all Bedford papers today.

According to one facebook poster one of the consultations was attended by a Folkestone representative. Perhaps there is a freight plan after all.

​

The Beds Bulletin had an article too (their website also has a version of the above quoted one), and more interestingly a letter to the editor opposing Route E. The email address of the correspondent pointed me to this website: https://bootroutee.co.uk/

 

[MarkRedon]

There's a fairly well informed article in the Bedford Independent of 04/03/2021 entitled "Oxford-Cambridge Arc: How will East-West rail impact Bedford?". It's available at: https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/oxford-cambridge-arc-how-will-east-west-rail-impact-bedford/

The Rail Freight Group RFG’s director general, Maggie Simpson is quoted as saying:

"We still consider that there is a strong case for rail freight on the route, both as part of the strategic rail network but also and importantly to support the construction of the new homes and infrastructure promised across the Oxford – Cambridge route... Describing it as ‘a key opportunity for freight and sustainable development’, Simpson added she understood that there had been no decision yet taken ‘as to whether the line will be built in a way that freight can use it.’"

I take hope from The Planner's comment that "The north chord has moved from crayons to proper engineering pens from what I hear." It would remain challenging to plan freight paths during the day, I assume?

 

[zwk500]

There's a fairly well informed article in the Bedford Independent of 04/03/2021 entitled "Oxford-Cambridge Arc: How will East-West rail impact Bedford?". It's available at: https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/oxford-cambridge-arc-how-will-east-west-rail-impact-bedford/

The Rail Freight Group RFG’s director general, Maggie Simpson is quoted as saying:

"We still consider that there is a strong case for rail freight on the route, both as part of the strategic rail network but also and importantly to support the construction of the new homes and infrastructure promised across the Oxford – Cambridge route... Describing it as ‘a key opportunity for freight and sustainable development’, Simpson added she understood that there had been no decision yet taken ‘as to whether the line will be built in a way that freight can use it.’"

It's almost certain that the line will be built to freight standards - gradient, curve, loading gauge. It would save <1% of the budget but have a huge impact on future operations.

I take hope from The Planner's comment that "The north chord has moved from crayons to proper engineering pens from what I hear." It would remain challenging to plan freight paths during the day, I assume?

Through Bedford Midland, depending on how it is rebuilt (I'm guessing it will need to be) you might have a standard hourly path available. Between Bletchley and Northampton (the next regulating point) all the problems previously mentioned still apply.

 

[mwmbwls]

There's a fairly well informed article in the Bedford Independent of 04/03/2021 entitled "Oxford-Cambridge Arc: How will East-West rail impact Bedford?". It's available at: https://www.bedfordindependent.co.uk/oxford-cambridge-arc-how-will-east-west-rail-impact-bedford/

This is part of a series of articles published by the Bedford Independent. Opposition is emerging to the selection of a route to Cambridge leaving the MML north of Bedford Midland and routing near to Brickhill.Much of the earlier Bedford Independent articles explored the earlier controversy. All of the people who did not favour this route have piled in - including Councillors with one eye on forthcoming elections. The most sensible analysis of what is going on comes from local blogger John Kell in his Bedford Rail blog - Bedford Rail (wordpress.com)

 

[swt_passenger]

I was on Bicester Road bridge, Launton this afternoon looking west at the new concrete columns for Charbridge Lane bridge and couldn't help noticing that they appear to be foul of the trackbed. I'm no civil engineer (indeed I've been known to be quite uncivil at times!) but there can't have been a dreadful mistake. Could it be that they're temporary supports which will be removed once the deck is in place? Or might they be jacked out of the way to their correct position later? If so, why were they made on-site? This blurred image gives an idea:
View attachment 91381

I was wondering was there ever an answer to this question? For some reason the attached photo, which showed all the concrete piles, is no longer working for me...

 

[snowball]

I was wondering was there ever an answer to this question? For some reason the attached photo, which showed all the concrete piles, is no longer working for me...

The link no longer works for me either.

My first conclusion was that (as you hint) they are perhaps not bridge columns but piles which when completed will be entirely underground. However they still seem to be not underneath where the bridge supports will be. The only guess I could make is that the bridge will be a box-type structure with an integral concrete floor, and that they are placed to support that.

Edit: or perhaps they're test piles? I once watched a bridge being built over the A1 at Wetherby and some piles were put in what seemed an irrelevant place. I asked one of the workers and he said they were test piles.

 

[swt_passenger]

The link no longer works for me either.

My first conclusion was that (as you hint) they are perhaps not bridge columns but piles which when completed will be entirely underground. However they still seem to be not underneath where the bridge supports will be. The only guess I could make is that the bridge will be a box-type structure with an integral concrete floor, and that they are placed to support that.

Edit: or perhaps they're test piles? I once watched a bridge being built over the A1 at Wetherby and some piles were put in what seemed an irrelevant place. I asked one of the workers and he said they were test piles.

Sometimes they let the concrete set then cut the top off and fold down the exposed rebar and cast what’s called a pile cap, a sort of “concrete deck” that will subsequently be buried, or at least out of sight. I guess there’ll be more pictures eventually...

(by the way it wasn’t my original question...)

 

[fishwomp]

I was between Claydon Jct / Steeple Claydon today.
I am surprised to see the track still in situ given how the trackbed has been cleared elsewhere (of course it was still there last November when I last looked).

Trackbed well and truly flooded today.

looking east. The white crane(?)/pile driver?/wotsit? machine in the distance is at Steeple Claydon crossing where a new bridge is going in. There was a picture of that on https://mobile.twitter.com/ProgressEast last week.
is looking west - towards the junction and where HS2 will cross.

 

[Tobbes]

All of this harrumphing in Bedford makes me wonder if it actually intended to have a Brickhill / Clapham & Brickhill station built? If there's plans for lots more housing in north Bedford, then a direct service to Bedford Midland for London and to Cambridge makes it much more attractive.

 

[mr_jrt]

The big problem will be capacity on the slow lines, I suspect. Bromham Road bridge was rebuilt with only room for the existing 4 tracks, and beyond it I doubt there's room for any more lines out of Bedford anyway (though it is only ~280m until room becomes available), so it's going to be a bit of a bottleneck unless EWR can "slot into" spare paths from terminating Thameslink services.

 

[jfowkes]

So what is the current status of the Bedford - Cambridge section, in terms of progress through the approvals/decision process?

What's the next steps and when would we expect more news?

Sorry if this has been answered above but I'm struggling to make complete sense of what's been posted so far.

 

[edwin_m]

The big problem will be capacity on the slow lines, I suspect. Bromham Road bridge was rebuilt with only room for the existing 4 tracks, and beyond it I doubt there's room for any more lines out of Bedford anyway (though it is only ~280m until room becomes available), so it's going to be a bit of a bottleneck unless EWR can "slot into" spare paths from terminating Thameslink services.

I think that could be achieved by bringing EWR into new platforms where the station building now is, and merging it into the Slows between the existing platforms and Bromham Road bridge. Thameslink turns back in the platforms so only freight and southbound stopping EMR services would conflict with EWR at this junction.

 

[Trainee9]

At Bletchley, some white boxes stacked two high have appeared alongside the removed section of the viaduct, where the new box section is going to be built. I could not get a closer view than from the Water Eaton Road compound entrance, but these could be the precast concrete box sections forming the sides of the box.
The large diameter piling work has ceased and the piling machine has gone.

 

[snowball]

So what is the current status of the Bedford - Cambridge section, in terms of progress through the approvals/decision process?

What's the next steps and when would we expect more news?

Sorry if this has been answered above but I'm struggling to make complete sense of what's been posted so far.

The next stp is publication of a detailed proposed route in corridor E.

 

[MikeT]

In a letter in the March edition of "Kempston Calling" someone from BootRouteE.co.uk states that "This makes Bedford Midland a prime target to become a freight marshalling yard, like Cricklewood". Scaremongering, with totally incorrect facts, at its best.

 

[jfowkes]

The next stp is publication of a detailed proposed route in corridor E.

Cheers, that was basically my understanding. So, what are the chances that the campaigns in Bedford and Cambridge to reconsider the route will have any traction, in terms of going away from corridor E to another corridor entirely?

 

[mwmbwls]

In a letter in the March edition of "Kempston Calling" someone from BootRouteE.co.uk states that "This makes Bedford Midland a prime target to become a freight marshalling yard, like Cricklewood". Scaremongering, with totally incorrect facts, at its best.

Or Trumpian misinformation? I can't find the article/letter in "Kempston Calling" that you refer to. Did someone use a pseudonym when writing his/her letter. What I have found, however, is a recently published report indicating the development of a spatial framwork for the whole Oxford Cambridge Arc Planning for sustainable growth in the Oxford-Cambridge Arc (publishing.service.gov.uk) published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in February which indicates an Arc wide Strategic Development Framework. This will encompass the inputs of all other Government Departments including the Treasury and the DfT. The latter will subject any rail infrastructure changes to the GRIP process - which includes a public enquiry as an integral part of the process.

As mentioned upstream Bronham bridge is a key pinch point - but I think that the whole of Bedford Station is going to require a "Reading" scale of rebuild with an mezzanine raft containing the ticket office and circulating area on the upper deck together with annannexed multi story car park to free up the space required.

 

[Bald Rick]

I really don’t understand why anyone thinks Bromham Road Bridge is going to be a problem. The slow lines are hardly going to be taxed, even with EWR.

 

[MikeT]

Or Trumpian misinformation? I can't find the article/letter in "Kempston Calling" that you refer to. Did someone use a pseudonym when writing his/her letter. What I have found, however, is a recently published report indicating the development of a spatial framwork for the whole Oxford Cambridge Arc Planning for sustainable growth in the Oxford-Cambridge Arc (publishing.service.gov.uk) published by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government in February which indicates an Arc wide Strategic Development Framework. This will encompass the inputs of all other Government Departments including the Treasury and the DfT. The latter will subject any rail infrastructure changes to the GRIP process - which includes a public enquiry as an integral part of the process.

As mentioned upstream Bronham bridge is a key pinch point - but I think that the whole of Bedford Station is going to require a "Reading" scale of rebuild with an mezzanine raft containing the ticket office and circulating area on the upper deck together with annannexed multi story car park to free up the space required.

It was on page 13 of the March edition. I won't mention who wrote it but the website exists.

 

[richieb1971]

As Bald Rick says north of Bedford station the only trains that use the Bromham road "Slow" arch are southern fast services and 20 odd freights a day. With EWR trains also using the slow arch, it will increase traffic but not to the point of creating capacity issues. Of the 3 mainlines going from London to the north, those 2 slow tracks north of Bedford are the least utilized and are not really utilized for high speed at all.

 

[zwk500]

I really don’t understand why anyone thinks Bromham Road Bridge is going to be a problem. The slow lines are hardly going to be taxed, even with EWR.

As Bald Rick says north of Bedford station the only trains that use the Bromham road "Slow" arch are southern fast services and 20 odd freights a day. With EWR trains also using the slow arch, it will increase traffic but not to the point of creating capacity issues. Of the 3 mainlines going from London to the north, those 2 slow tracks north of Bedford are the least utilized and are not really utilized for high speed at all.

Will the Ford End Road bridge at the south end of the station need rebuilding or is it clear enough anyway if additional platforms needed to be added on the site of the current station building? I'm guessing some extra platforms will be needed once running East of bedford Starts or will TL use the turnback siding?

 

[richieb1971]

Will the Ford End Road bridge at the south end of the station need rebuilding or is it clear enough anyway if additional platforms needed to be added on the site of the current station building? I'm guessing some extra platforms will be needed once running East of bedford Starts or will TL use the turnback siding?

There will be no additional platforms. Platform 1A which is a terminus platform for current 2/3 car trains from Bletchley will pass through the station building and out the northern side where a turnback siding exists. This would be attached to the mainline on the northern side. Your basically turning 2 dead end roads into a through road. The station will move closer to Ashburnham road by about 50 feet.