East - West Rail update (Oxford to Bedford) - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[paul7575]

...According to a recent artist's impression I have seen somewhere - don't ask me where, please! - the part over at least the Fast line of the LNWR^▸ (London North Western Railway)'s main line is being replaced by a long bridge on the roof of which the flyover lines will be replaced. It looks a bit like the structure used on the Trent Valley flyover just north of Rugby station.

Here’s the drawing (pdf attached below) of the intended box structure from the planning application.

Paul

[Electric train]

I thought one of the plans of East West rail was to build a High Level Bletchley station on the flyover.

No - or almost no - the TWAO^▸ (Transport and Works Act Order ) plans showed the new platforms on the embankment with only the short bit at the south end on the viaduct, on top of the ground-level access building. The same plans don't show any new viaduct as it was not new or different enough to need to go through planning. That implies the dodgy spans are being replaced like for pretty similar, though based on absence of evidence not evidence of absence of new designs.

The partial rebuild of the viaduct is subject to a separate “planning” application, (under permitted development rights) because it wasn’t applied for as part of the TWA Order, presumably because at that stage it was thought to be getting preventive maintenance only.  (Waterproofing etc?)
Milton Keynes planning Application no: 19/03082/PANOTH

It probably only needs permitted development,

The rest of the line went through the TWAO to facilitate the closing of level crossings and the construction of bridges, but more importantly allowed for compulsory purchase orders for the acquisition of land for access both construction only and maintainenace

[stuving]

The partial rebuild of the viaduct is subject to a separate “planning” application, (under permitted development rights) because it wasn’t applied for as part of the TWA Order, presumably because at that stage it was thought to be getting preventive maintenance only.  (Waterproofing etc?)
Milton Keynes planning Application no: 19/03082/PANOTH

It's got a bit confusing. In the TWAO^▸ (Transport and Works Act Order ), which was in only Network Rail's (NR^» (Network Rail - home page))'s name, they said:

Works to Bletchley Flyover comprise signficant repair work, including piling, strengthening, and bearing changes.

Piling? Why? Anyway, obviously it was one of those just jobs that just growed a bit once looked at, since now:

‘Bletchley flyover’ was built in the early 1960s and allows trains travelling from West to East to cross over the West Coast main line.

But now 14 of the flyover’s 37 spans need to be dismantled and rebuilt to modern standards for the East West Rail project.

Preparatory removals of lineside equipment and overhead electric lines has been taking place for a year, with work ramping up at Easter to drill and cut out the existing concrete flyover's spans.

Weighing in at a hefty 295 tonnes, the first was ‘Span 17’ which was split into two and removed on 22 April.

The first sections of the flyover are being dismantled without the need to close the railway.

Eight sections which cross directly over the West Coast main line will cause it to be closed between the 2-3, 8-10 and 23-25 May for the rest of the flyover to be removed.

The TWAO itself was granted to NR only in January, after an inspector's report. But the 23 spans not being replaced need new bearings and parapets, and work started in August last year, with that being done by Freyssinet under contract to the EWR Alliance.

All new bridges go through planning, as we've seen before, though of a rather odd kind.

Edit: VickiS - Clarifying Acronym

[4064ReadingAbbey]

...According to a recent artist's impression I have seen somewhere - don't ask me where, please! - the part over at least the Fast line of the LNWR^▸ (London North Western Railway)'s main line is being replaced by a long bridge on the roof of which the flyover lines will be replaced. It looks a bit like the structure used on the Trent Valley flyover just north of Rugby station.

Here’s the drawing (pdf attached below) of the intended box structure from the planning application.

Paul

Thank you, that's the drawing I remembered.

[signalandtelegraph]

Is it me or does the train pictured here look a bit like the original APT^▸ (Advanced Passenger Train)?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55770529

[bradshaw]

This might suggest that Roger Ford?s bionic duckweed powered vehicles, as mentioned in Modern Railways, might still have a chance!

When asked by the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) why the lines wouldn't be electrified, he said these lines might potentially bypass the overhead wire technology altogether.
"We're building it in such a way that we can use, probably, the very latest technology, potentially, in the future," he said. 

[grahame]

There seems to be a significant difference of viewpoint here.

From the Government Minister

Diesel engines will initially run on the lines, but Mr Shapps said he hoped more environmentally friendly trains, for example powered by hydrogen or new battery technology, would replace them in the future.

When asked by the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) why the lines wouldn't be electrified, he said these lines might potentially bypass the overhead wire technology altogether.

"We're building it in such a way that we can use, probably, the very latest technology, potentially, in the future," he said.

From experts at yesterday's TWSW^» (TravelWatch SouthWest - website) seminar - notes at http://www.passenger.chat/24566

Transport is 1/3 of the carbon.  And from where we are, we need to act fast
1. It's late ... if you're in a hole as we are, stop digging
e.g. Road schemes for more personal traffic are incompatible with needs
2. No time to rely on upcoming technology being researched and developed
So ... a need to reduce travel and especially by personal vehicles.

I prefer to listen to the experts in this case, especially as they do not muddy the waters around their position with words like "hope", "probably" and "potentially" which the government minister - who has a background which does not shout "transport" prior to the DfT^» (Department for Transport - about) (see ((here)) ) uses

[Electric train]

I did find the bit rhetoric from Shapes about reversing Beeching ..................... wasn't that a 1960's Conservative Government policy .............
Its amazing thing political amnesia 

[eightonedee]

I did find the bit rhetoric from Shapes about reversing Beeching ..................... wasn't that a 1960's Conservative Government policy .............
Its amazing thing political amnesia

There seems to have been political consensus at the time. Many lines had been closed before Beeching (as is often pointed out), and many of the closures were actually carried out under the first Wilson administration (first two terms), between 1964 and 1970, with the last few (like Ilfracombe and Bridport) either under Heath or Wilson's second term.

[grahame]

From the Bedford Independent

It seems that there is concern at the noise of freight trains at night ... from a long article ...

Bedford Tory councillors in row over “freight doom” of East West Rail route
...

But Cllr Wootton said he “disputed the benefits to the town of having the line come through Bedford.”

He added: “Nobody has mentioned the elephant in the room, which is freight. It’s going to be built for freight from the east coast.

“What the mayor’s decision actually has done is doom Bedford to be a rail hub in the evening and at night. We’re going to have heavy freight trains running all night and through all these northern villages.”

But the mayor hit back by saying that it was a “worrying statement” for a representative of the villages to make and admit he had not seen the documents or read them.

Cllr Headley, who represents the borough on the project board, said: “I’m shocked that you’ve suddenly discovered that freight trains use railway lines as well as passenger trains.

“They already use the existing line through Bedford.”

[grahame]

This has spawned a new topic - http://www.passenger.chat/24647 - on "Train Noise"; not just an issue for those wanting to to to bed in Bedford!

[Lee]

I am posting the following article partly because it may be of interest to members, and partly because it may inspire some broadgage "Blue Sky Thinking" on how such matters should be dealt with, and I could really use some entertainment as we head into a new lockdown over here:

https://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/news/people/bedford-residents-fury-as-letter-from-east-west-rail-reveals-houses-for-possible-demolition-3186071

Bedford residents' fury as letter from East West Rail reveals houses for possible demolition

Angry residents were left in shock after receiving a letter saying their house may be demolished as part of the East West Rail route consultation.

East West Railway Company said the letters represented a “reasonable worst-case scenario” for impacts on properties, and added that it would continue to work with local communities to mitigate impacts where possible.

Neighbours in the Poets area of Bedford met Tuesday night (March 30) to discuss the proposals - with some shocked they had not even received a letter.

(Article continues with much "scripting" if you try and copy and paste any of it...)

There is a wider context as well that I should make you aware of:

https://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/19201450.big-ideas-needed-next-steps-east-west-rail-plans/

Big ideas needed before next steps in East-West Rail plans

Ideas about how Oxford train station and Bicester's London Road level crossing could be improved are being requested as part of a review into rail upgrades.

The Government announced it plans to spend £760m on reviving the railway line between Bicester and Bletchley earlier this year as part of its plans to create a direct train link between Oxford and Cambridge.

But before the East-West Rail Company (EWR), which is overseeing the works, can carry out steps beyond this, it is asking for ideas from the public.

The company has described the upgrades as a 'once in a lifetime' opportunity.

EWR wants to people to give their opinion on its plans to upgrade Oxford, Oxford Parkway and Bicester Village stations, as a further four trains per hour would call at these stations once the project is finished.

It also wants to know how residents think changes to the Bicester level crossing should be dealt with to stop long waits for cars and pedestrians.

Further afield from Oxfordshire it is also asking people their opinions on five different options for the new railway route alignment between Bedford and Cambridge, which is set to be the final part of the new line to be built.

The consultation is taking place at eastwestrail.co.uk

Jeremy Long, Chair of the Oxfordshire Local Enterprise Partnership said: "Once up and running, East West Rail will be critical for our local economy by directly linking people living and working across Oxfordshire to and from destinations across the arc, through to Cambridge and beyond.

"We would like to see the railway delivered in most sustainable form possible, and for consideration to be given, as it is being constructed, for the rail corridor to be used to enhance digital connectivity as well."

Ever since rail minister Chris Heaton-Harris announced new funding for the route in January, there have been calls for the route to be electrified, instead of running diesel trains as is currently planned.

Liberal Democrat MP^▸ (Member of Parliament) for Oxford West and Abingdon, Layla Moran, has started a petition calling on the Government to electrify the line.

(Article continues, largely but not completely annoying script-free)

[CyclingSid]

I doubt that you are ever going to find a set of people who would be happy about their homes being demolished.

[jdw.wor]

I would be  particularly upset if my house was demolished because of a consultation! Perhaps the building of a railway may be a more acceptable reason.

[Bmblbzzz]

Beware of the leopard!