Great Western Coffee Shop

From the Save The Train Forum :

I know just what is going to happen!!

Absolutely bugger all!

Oh it makes me so angry!

Besides, we all know that the best we'll get is Norton to Evesham anyway.

I mean, can't FGW/NR see that the full redoubling is absolutely essential. It is- think of the delays caused at the Reading bottleneck due to late running services!

Come on, this is not good enough!

 >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:( >:(

Now April and not a squeak from Network rail or FGW. I am sure the subject will be raised at the meeting with FGW on friday.

If anyone on this forum is going, please raise it!

The very latest...

http://oxfordmail.co.uk/display.var.2172240.0.rail_improvements_on_track.php (http://oxfordmail.co.uk/display.var.2172240.0.rail_improvements_on_track.php)

Isnt there a meeting in Charlbury tonight? What excellent timing  ;D
http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=1975.msg14682#msg14682

Are new/restored platforms at Finstock, Charlbury, Ascott-under-Wychwood and Honeybourne included in the preferred option?

From the Save The Train Forum :


Further article quote :


The Network Rail Strategic Business Plan Update can be found in the link below.
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/4357.aspx

Hooray!  ;D ;D ;D

This is an excellent start! This must go ahead. 8)

Unfortunately, I too am pessimistic about how much signalling/ new platforms will be done! >:(

But anything is good. ;)

Let's hope that petition, although perhaps rather redundant, will just encourage Darling to release the funds - there are 315 signatures now (well over the 200 needed for Gordon to look at it)!

Just back from meeting, NR route manager and FGW route manager there. NR manager claimed that the solution they are proposing will deliver 95% of the benefits at 33% of the cost of a full redoubling mainly due to not having to get into the Oxford signalling or tunnels at the Hereford end.

If ORR give go ahaed for funding (june decision) then first sod cut in Jan09, finished May 2010.

Platforms and footbridges included in funding plan.

Lots more said at meeting, will try and note it down in another  thread but thought that this might be relavent to this thread.

Does that means all possibly affected stations- i.e Finstock, Charlbury, Ascott-under-Wychwood and Honeybourne?

So this would leave single track sections of 9 miles at either end with a central double track section of around 30 miles. That would certainly appear to have a lot more operational flexibility than currently, and I guess the timetable would be planned that the services crossed somewhere in the middle of the double section, affording for plenty of margin for error if one service is running late.  

Lee,

Finstock would still be on the single line, the doubling would stop about 0.5mile to the Oxford side of Charlbury. NR manager didnt name stations but stated four footbridges.

Made the claim that this would allow at least hourly service.

Some improvements to freight lines and Bicester line to allow passenger trains to wait without blocking main line will assist in reducing problems due to remaining Wolvercote-finstock bit of single line.

The big cost for complete redoubling would be the Oxford signalling, this is not due for replacement yet, if this needs altering then the whole lot gets done which is a huge cost which would prevent it going in th strategic plan.

If and when the Oxford station environs get resignalled than a possibility not excluded by the current plan is a phase 2 to redouble the remaining work at a later stage.

Thanks, IanL.

Excellent news! :)

Shame it will take so long...  :'(

Station work-wise there would have to be new platforms at Charlbury and Ascott-under-Wychwood, but at Honeybourne, the old island platform (Stratford-upon-Avon and Cheltenham services used the opposite face) is pretty much intact and could be brought back into use relatively easily. The question here is whether the whole length would be restored to use, as it could probably take a 2+8 HST, in contrast to the three-coach platform on the single line.

Not clear on footbridge locations (though CBY and HYB are obvious), but if they are going to spend the money, then Kingham really could do with a new disabled/cycle/baby buggy-accessible bridge while they are at it, because if you can't manage steps, then you can't reach the Oxford/London-bound platform at present.

After questions about parking at Charlbury station - and people leaving cars in the town and walking down to the station - Dave Ward, Network Rail's western route director, said at the meeting tonight that he would be taking up the issue of providing adequate car parking at all the stations on the route with the team in charge of the project, as station facilities are very much part of the equation.

More parking could be tricky, as previously noted, at Shipton. And new housing at Honeybourne has eaten up what would have been an ideal area to extend into, though there is a lot of railway-owned land on the opposite side, behind the island platform, with disused sidings on, so maybe there is parking potential there.

However, if the shortlisted eco-town at Long Marston were to go ahead (and it would only make eco-sense if the rail link through to Stratford upon Avon is reinstated - and maybe even to Cheltenham via the Gloucester & Warwickshire preserved line - then they may need to reinvent Honeybourne Junction in all its four-platform glory, along with the spectacular triangular and burrowing junctions just to the east (the GWR didn't do things by halves in the 1900s). How about a Birmingham-Worcester-Evesham-Honeybourne-Long Marston-Stratford-Birmingham circular route and Stratford-Oxford via the Cotswold Line?

And let's not forget Chipping Campden, where Gloucestershire County Council has long had aspirations to reopen the station. Until now, lack of capacity on the single line has always stymied this, but a green light for double track would change the equation here.

Certainly interesting times in these parts.


Give them a break - in rail project terms, this is warp speed. They are talking 15 months of work, while keeping trains running for as much of that time as possible. All told it would be just over three years from starting study work to completion, which compares pretty well with Chiltern's redoubling schemes.

Now all we've got to do is hope that D(a)fT and the ORR see sense.

I wasn't moaning as such, just wishing someone could wave a magic wand!

Unfortunately, a new road has eaten the track-bed south of Stratford upon Avon station. >:(

The Gloucester and Warwickshire railway (GWR) want to extend from their current Broadway**, to Honeybourne and then to Stratford Racecourse (thereby linking the two race courses. This might use the island platform!!!!

Can any of the existing platforms (e.g. Honeybourne) be extended, to as near to HST length as possible?

Are all new platforms (except on the halts) be HST length, to prevent the need for SDO?

This is great news.

**The GWR have bought trackbed up to Broadway, and are currently extending from Toddington.

Re Stratford, the councils were warned about the consequences for rail reinstatement when they decided to build over the trackbed, but if the eco-town does go ahead, the developers will have to stump up for rebuilding the route into Stratford, whatever it costs.

Their brochure http://www.stratford.gov.uk/files/seealsodocs/7963/Long%20Marston%20Eco-Town%20Proposal%20-%20Oct%202007.pdf (http://www.stratford.gov.uk/files/seealsodocs/7963/Long%20Marston%20Eco-Town%20Proposal%20-%20Oct%202007.pdf) doesn't mention Cheltenham, but does talk about connecting to Worcester and Oxford via the Cotswold Line, so they would also have to foot the bill for the work that would be needed at Honeybourne, and why not Evesham to Norton junction double track while they're at it, as I don't really see how you could put many more trains through that section without redoubling.

It would be less of a problem redoubling straight away at that end of the line (hook up some colour-light signals to the many spare levers at Evesham signal box until they get round to looking at Worcester area resignalling) than trying to go through from Finstock to Oxford, as that is tied up with resignalling at Oxford - due 2014-15. Dave Ward made it clear that it just wasn't cost-effective to try to graft something on to the existing system at Oxford, but that when resignalling is due, redoubling would be on the agenda, providing the current plans have been approved and implemented.

I don't know the detail at this stage (Network Rail are still doing a lot of design work), but there's almost certainly space to build full-length platforms at Charlbury and Honeybourne (where BR had removed the long platform before the reopening), but Ascott would logically be Turbo-sized - though for at least three cars, rather than two, and they really could do with adding a few metres on to the existing one at the same time, to make it able to take a three-car set properly. It's about two-and-a-half (three old DMU cars?) right now.

If anyone wants to see the post-1909 track layout at Honeybourne, I just remembered that Western Main Lines: Moreton-in-Marsh to Worcester, by Vic Mitchell and Keith Smith (Middleton Press), has reproductions of the large-scale Ordnance Survey maps of the junctions and station, plus photos of the station in GWR and BR steam days and how it looks today, showing the current platform and the remains of the island.

Good, it will serve them right! ;D ;D ;D

And then: 4 platforms at Honeybourne, with full GWR replica canopy anyone? ;D ;D ;D

willc article link.
http://www.oxfordmail.net/news/headlines/display.var.2177818.0.railway_updates_farreaching_benefits.php

This is where my petition comes in. It has plenty of signatures. Please email the url to people (MPs from the area etc.) to let NR know that there IS support!

Good News this but credit also has to made to FGW and Andrew Haines who are heavily involved in this scheme but dont seem to have been mentioned in prevoius posts

willc has mentioned FGW and Andrew Haines involvement in his articles, and this has also been mentioned in previous related posts/topics.

Briefly donning my professional hat for a moment, there is only so much space and so many words you get for articles and at this point the key thing to get across was what Network Rail actually propose to do and what they were saying about it, as the organisation actually driving the process. FGW's support for it is pretty much taken as a given by people along the route.

As I visit Stratford about once a week to visit elderly mother I read stuff in the local paper about the eco-town at Long Marston. Some weeks ago the developers were talking about reinstating (don't they mean "upgrading"/putting back like wot used to be) the line to Honeybourne for access to Worcester - nothing about access to Stratford, although that's clearly as logical or more so. You're right about the old trackbed south of Stratford station as another relative of mine owned a flat in a block built on the old embankment, but the line could be put back with some road re-arrangement.

Whilst at it, makes sense to reopen to Cheltenham, although the Waitrose development has interfered with the route of the old through line to Malvern Road station and the junction with the existing main line at Lansdowne Road. But apparently the so-called "Honeybourne Way" was developed so as to allow the track to be relayed.

Incidentally, some warehouses have been built across the old trackbed by the former level crossing in Station Road Long Marston. And as regards, the GWR's proposals to get to Stratford Racecourse, I'm not sure the end of the existing trackbed south of Stratford is that near the racecourse.