Great Western Coffee Shop

I wish I could read this article. However, it looks as if the current plans have been rejected. :o

http://www.planningresource.co.uk/Development_Control/login/1104575/

Hopefully ChrisB will be able to find out something and report back.

By the Inspector only. The Secretary of State can however make her own mind up.

That article rewads (free registration!) -

Further.....

Chiltern are already on the case as per this 'bat news' from October re the Wolvercote tunnel.


This, I surmise, is why there's been no decision since the Inspector reported at the end of July. The SoS has to announce a decision by the end of January.

I'm sure that this will not cause the scheme to collapse.  It would be batty if it did {cough}.

The actual report and the SofS's 'not yet in a position to decide' letter are on the DfT page:


http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/twa-10-app-01/

Obviously, the protected status of bats should be taken very seriously. But I fail to see the severity on existing infrastructure. If this was due to the new chord bulldozing through a habitat, I would sympathise, but this is an existing tunnel.

Isn't this line due to be part of EWR as well? So will this stall those plans - no-one mentioned it in the recent debate in parliament. A few bats could de-rail a large rail project.

Could the bats be moved?

I would be surprised, no, amazed, if a compromise can't be reached, especially given Teresa Villiers open comments on the link in the East-West Rail 30-minute debate a couple of days ago - she must be aware of the current situation.

No...don't beleive all you read in the press

The Inspector^s report and the letter from the Secretary of State^s recording her views on the report are now published on the DfT website.

http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/twa-20111115 (http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/twa-20111115)

The Secretary of State writes that she is minded to give permission for the Evergreen 3 proposals to run an Oxford to London Marylebone via Bicester train service.

However, this is subject to Chiltern and Natural England being able to agree the necessary mitigation measures for the bats in Wolvercot Tunnel.  The Secretary of State has given the two parties until the 13th December to agree a detailed way forward and subject to this being achieved she will then sign the TWA order by the 20th January 2012.

It should be noted that the Inspector had recommended, despite its many benefits, that the scheme be refused because of the bat issue.

Based on this, Chiltern Railways have said that many of the trade press are starting to report that the scheme has been refused.  However, his decision has effectively been over-ruled as long as a solution can be agreed with Natural England.

Roll on 2014 - a year late but it's coming!

But surely there are already trains going through the tunnel! Both passenger and freight.

Yes, there are trains using the tunnel at present, but low frequency and low speed.

The Chiltern service would see high frequency and much higher speeds, and that is where the problem is perceived to be.

It's absolutely ridiculous that the presence of bats should have any effect on improvements to the country's infrastructure.  There are far too many of them all ready - it's not as if they are in danger of extinction.  And they leave a mess if you are unfortunate to have them in your house/garage/church etc.

We're mad to put the needs of bats above the needs of people.
 

I had already posted all this if you'd read back a bit...

Paul

From the Oxford Mail (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/9368010.Wildlife_could_halt___130m_Oxford_train_link/):

Define "acceptable limits". I can see another fight by them later.

The Inspector was more worried over the works in the tunnel, too, with all the works trains passing through too

What surprises me is that this was a major concern for Chiltern well over 18 months ago - well before the public enquiry - and yet no acceptable solution appears to have been forthcoming in that time. Now it has four weeks to find one!

There was a trial use of the tunnel lights, back in August - see an excellent article from the Oxford Mail (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/yourtown/oxford/9195101.Light_at_the_end_of_the_tunnel_for_bats/), which gives some further information on the wildlife implications:

Apparently it's also concern about the Great Crested Newt that is delaying the project.

Now, again - concern for endangered species is important, but these newts seem to turn up at every development/bypass in the country. How are they so rare?

Thats a brilliantly perceptive  comment...send it to the SoS!. Maybe  DB Chiltern's parent company have experience of dealing with bats on the Continent, and could put in their four pfennigs worth ?

They are probably rare and endangered somewhere or other in the EU, like bats I guess.  So everyone has to bend over backwards whatever the local situation, even if they are overwhelmed by the darn things...

Paul

From the Oxford Times (http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/yourtown/bicester/9386462.Stables_owner_thanks_bats_for_delaying_new_rail_link/):

7 trains an hour?

2 Chiltern trains each way, sure, and one freight, max.....

Perhaps Chitern should count how many horses you see grazing contently in fields beside their  mainline.

Though it would be around the 7 trains per hour mark if East-West Rail gets the go-ahead as predicted by the FT in the link you quoted.  Do we assume that the bat problem is going to be solved?

oh, I think so.

I'm surprised the owner of the stables isn't more concerned about possible transmission of the deadly Hendra virus from bats to horses in that case. If it was me, I'd be a damn sight more scared of that than I would be of the occasional train passing by....

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14377-could-killer-horse-virus-spread-amongst-humans.html

Given that the only known outbreaks of the Hendra virus in horses have all been recorded in Australia (see http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs329/en/index.html (http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs329/en/index.html)), and that there are no native Fruit Bats in the UK, I would suggest that anyone 'scared' of an outbreak occurring anywhere near a UK railway tunnel is probably a bit of a wuss.

Oh, and I, um, came across this while researching it: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6538016/Fellatio-common-among-fruit-bats-says-research.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6538016/Fellatio-common-among-fruit-bats-says-research.html)

Yeah, but TJ my underlying point is really just that: quite frankly anyone who thinks a handful of trains rumbling past each day is going to seriously affect their horses is by definition quite a lot of a wuss. In my very humble opinion, obviously.

Quite agree, Phil.  But there's nowt as queer as folk...

Apparently the Chancellor has now added support for East West Rail to his plans - does that mean all the bats will now give up?  Or will all the objectors revisit their previous TWA arguments because there'll now be more trains running?

Paul

I'm presuming that if the TWA for Chiltern is granted, there won't actually be a need for a further one, certainly south of Bicester Town?

Good question.  I would suspect not.  There is, after all, no new railway on this section - just restoration of the mothballed section from Claydon to Bletchley.

If East-West rail is to follow hot on the heels of Evergreen 3, might it make sense to do all the engineering for the Phase 2B part of the programme at the same time, rather than having to return soon after to finish the job (i.e. re-lay the second track through Wolvercote Tunnel, rebuild Islip with two platforms, etc.)?  I know that efforts have been made to make it fairly easy to bolt on the extra bits and bobs of Phase 2B, but even so...

In a world not run by "bean counters" doing both phases of Biscester Oxford at the same time makes perfevt sense, would be cheaper in the long run. OK there'd be over capacity for a couple of years but then again there was massive over  capacity when Brunel first opened the GWR!

Hang on though, had this thought overnight - that was the situation for Chiltern though, wasn't it?....I thought they were applying because of the new station & facilities at Water Eaton & Bicester Town?.....in which case, isn't the new statiion at Wilmslow the equivalent?....


The Treasury won't sign this off until the Counties provide their contributions....that might hold things up, and the statement indicated that they would then instruct NR to add it to CP5....so not before 2014. Elsewhere I read that it is likely to be allocated funding in the final year of this Government, i.e. 2015.

Chiltern will want to be up & running by then.

I thought the main reason they had to apply was because of the new stretch of railway, admittedly short, linking the Chiltern Line with Bicester Town, though of course you might be right.  Was a TWA necessary when they built Aylesbury Vale Parkway and upgraded that existing track to passenger train standards?

And yes, I agree with your summary on the financial aspects.  I think, yes, it would make sense to do all the works in one go, but financial red tape (or eightf48544's good old 'bean counters' he likes so much), would probably make that impractical without there being a delay to the Chiltern scheme.

No TWA for AVP....

Then I can't see a difference between building Aylesbury Vale Parkway and building Winslow - not Wilmslow as you stated - that already exists and isn't on the EWR route.   ;)

Bats won't halt rail plans

9:20am Tuesday 13th December 2011 in Headlines
Skip social links
Print
Email
Comments(0)
 



THE threat of bats in a railway tunnel near Wolvercote holding up a new Rail service from Oxford to London Marylebone looks to have been lifted.
 
Chiltern Railways and Natural England have told the Government they are close to solving the bat problem to get the ^130m scheme back on track.
 
Transport Secretary Justine Greening last month revealed the risk to bats and great crested newts presented a major obstacle to Evergreen 3^s scheme to create a fast Oxford-Bicester-London service.
 
Chiltern Railways and Natural England were given until today to set out measures to resolve the problem, that had resulted in the scheme being denied approval by a planning inspector.
 
The rail company and environment group told the Oxford Mail they had met the deadline with new proposals submitted to the Government, although the details have not been made public.
 
Natural England spokesman Melissa Gill said: ^Natural England met with Chiltern Railways and agreed a way forward in respect of the outstanding issues surrounding bats in the tunnel.
 
^We will continue to work closely with Chiltern Railways to assist them in addressing these matters in their revised application. We have confirmed to the Department for Transport that in principle there is a good prospect of a licence being granted if outstanding issues are dealt with in the way that we agreed, should the Department for Transport issue the transport works order.^
 
News that the planning inspector had withheld approval from the massive scheme came as a blow to commuters who had been looking forward to a new service within three years.
 
The inspector said the bats used the tunnel for roosts and foraging.

And he warned more trains travelling at higher speed would put bats at risk and make the tunnel unusable for them.
 

Can't be long until an official announcement is made.  Anyone have any clues/inside information?

You're right.

It was stated that as long as Chiltern & Natural England agreed a way forward for the bats, the SoS was minded to sign the TWA by January 20th.

Wonder what happened?

Perhaps her pen ran out of ink?

I am - via my MP< who has copied me a letter from Mike Penning at the DfT.

He confirms that Chiltern & Natural England have agreed on a way forward to deal with thde bats & the newts, and that they are minded to sign the TWA.

Before signing, TWA rules now require the Dft to give those that took part in the enquiry another opportunity to express views on this new 'evidence' or to ask for the inquiry to be re-opened.

The letter to Chiltern & interested parties should shortly appear on this webpage
http://www.dft.gov.uk/topics/legislation/twa/twa-decision-letters/

So a delay while everyone involved gets a further chance to comment.....

I'm also hearing on a grapevine that as the DfT has given the green light to EWR, that they will be wanting Chiltern to combine their works with the EWR upgrade. Now NR can't start on EWR until Comtrol Period 5 (starts mid 2014), so there's likely a delay anyway.

Right, I suppose that all makes sense.  I'm all for the works being combined as long as it doesn't lead to a big delay, and Chiltern won't be happy at waiting for much longer.  Perhaps an agreement could be forthcoming where CP5 funding can be brought forward - after all, only a small portion of the total East-West Rail funding is required to finance the additional enhancements to the Oxford-Bicester section?  Otherwise we'll be looking at late 2015 at the earliest.  Let's get both of these important links up and running as soon as possible!

From what I've heard this afternoon, its looking like 2015 now....

At least that might give Chiltern a bit longer to get all their Mk3's finally refurbished.  ;)

More time to refine the timetable.

Refine? I've seen it already....

Well, it could be argued that the initial timetable had to be tweeked a bit to fit commuters in - mainly moving carriages.

They can really spend extra time to make sure each train has enough coaches and ensure the paths for the expresses are held up as little as possible.

The S of S has issued another 'minded to allow' letter - dated 24 Jan, but only just appeared on the website:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/twa-20120124/

Any further objections must be in by tomorrow.

Paul

Can you provide a link or details as to where you got this please?

Here you are: http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-oxford-^-london-line-statement (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-oxford-^-london-line-statement)

Paul

Shakes head in despair... all this to upgrade a working line! It isn't as if it is re-opening a long deserted trackbed that has become a wilderness!  Doesn't bode well for HS2, does it!

Thanks!

They're trying their utmost to avoid the whole project being called in for Judicial Review - which would add years before it got going....

Not to mention the additional costs.  Still, perhaps the route can be built to its full Phase 2 specification rather than having major modifications a couple of years after it opens for the East-West Rail Link - mind you, goodness knows how many endangered species are to be found in the mothballed section between Claydon and Bletchley!

It's already the DfTs intention for full Phase 2 spec being done in one hit by Chiltern once they get approval - they've been told to liaise with NR/East-West.

A WWII Japanese soldier perhaps...   ;D

Paul

Further, NR can't start on the Bicester-Bletchley section as their money for that is in CP5....

Oh no! Not the greater crested newt: that species so endangered, it turns up at every development...

Very frustrating for North Oxford commuters, especially for stuff such as noise reduction, surely that doesn't require a full review.

Anyone want to join me on a newt shoot ? >:(

No decision has been made yet. Discussions are taking place about how the two projects can be aligned to make delivcery more efficient and cost effective, but there is resignalling and electrification at Oxford to think about too.

Assuming East-West Rail is in the HLOS when it is announced in the summer, DfT could bring forward funding to the end of CP4 if it meant all these works could be co-ordinated.

Good to hear that discussions are taking place to get all the work between Oxford and Bicester done in one hit.

I think the decision to align has been taken, its just when....

According to DfT and Network Rail they haven't made any decision yet, but are assuming that both will go ahead as one enhancement between Oxford and Bicester.

Depends on who you talk to then....

The NIMBys have had their way again. According to the Oxford Mail, the enquiry is to be reopened at some undetermined future date about the Wolvercote tunnel bats (and some aother matters. By the tiome that has been settled, if it is at the rate of the enquiry so far, the Evergreen 3 works may be so delayed that they may fall into the CP5 period. Just at the same time central government is saying that running the railways is too expensive and costs should be cut. One of the first things they should consider is whether the extenisive consultation and enquiry times that must cost millions could be simplified.

Chiltern could still open as far as a temporary Islip parkway... ???

This would allow them to build up an A34 parkway base, before launching to Water Eaton and Oxford.

Unless the newts are where the chord is...

They can progress no further than the current service offering. They need the TWA order to make any work commercially viable

Update, extracted from latest Chiltern briefing, and reported on OBRAG website

The re-opening of the enquiry was slated for April 4 - I've just heard it's been postponed to May 29....so 4 days followed by the 4-day Jubilee bank holiday & 3 days before finally getting into its stride....and another two months down the drain.

TWA Order reported as approved this afternoon:

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/9993894.Chiltern_gets_go_ahead_for_second_Oxford_London_rail_link/

No longer 'AXED' as this thread suggested...   ::)

Paul

Indeed - I wonder who got that wrong? :-)

To be fair to Btline, the original topic heading for this thread (Chiltern Evergreen 3 AXED?) was a question and not a statement of fact.

Hence the smiley....

Can the Mods have a conflab & split some of these posts off into a new subject line as the question is now answered & not under discussion....

Finally, the inevitable decision has been reached.

Do we know when the line will close to be constructed.  2015 is slightly disappointing as an opening date, hopefully early in the year and not December 2015!

This is excellent news - I'm really pleased the correct decision has finally been reached. The delays has been very frustrating that a relatively small number of moaners can use the system to delay and increase the cost of a well thought out project that was always likely to proceed.

Looking forward to using the new (and hopefully cheaper) route from Oxford to London in 2015!

Moderator note:

This topic has been retitled to reflect earlier discussion and recent news.

Carry on as you were.   :)

bignosemac.   ;)

What happened to the title? Has it been AXED?

Good outcome, though, and another step in the right direction. As for the people with stables / B&B / meditation centre built close by, I have learned by your mistake. I will not open such a business close to a dormant rail line.

In the original FAQs, construction was reckoned to take about 12 to 15 months.  I suppose a lot depends on whether they still have a contractor on the starting blocks, and I think possibly more importantly, whether it now makes more sense to do the EWR aspects concurrently.


Paul

Except, in this case the line isn't dormant, and has both a passenger service and the occasional freight train. Which makes me wonder if the existing line had been upgraded first, and then permission put in for the new chord, would there have been less grounds to oppose it?

My Chiltern 'spies' tell me there's been an awful lot of activity on the route in the last couple of months.  Surveying and the like.  Appreciating that won't be the same gang who do all the hard graft, but it hopefully means that work can start sooner than later, and yes, the only sensible decision would be to do both phases concurrently - though sensible decisions are often not what actually happens!

No press releases on either the DfT site or the Evergreen 3 site yet.

It's made it into today's FT and the Independent, and assorted regional papers, and Construction Index etc, according to Google news...

Seems a pretty safe bet now, I reckon.

Paul

Glad to see this finally going ahead and I would like to hope that we will see a direct link between Milton Keynes/Bedford to Bristol via Oxford.

I think we can safely say we are in for a very interesting time over the next few years

Still nothing on the DfT's website, the Evergreen 3 site or indeed Chiltern Railways' website.  Seems a bit odd to me!

Couldn't agree more II ! I emailed the DaFT on Friday asking where it was, and was forewarned it could take 20 working days for me to get a reply. Now I wonder what else they could be worrying their pretty little heads about..hope they haven't founds newts hibernating underneath the bats in Wolvercote tunnel ! I cannot help wondering that if greater crested nets are so blinkin rare, why are they found to be holding up every infrastructure scheme...here in Portishead they are holding up the building of a much needed Sainsburys while they hibernate for 6 months !

It's on Chiltern's site under 'press releases' (but not 'news'); dated 18th October, and quoted elsewhere on the 19th:

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-given-green-light-build-new-rail-line-between-oxford-and-london

Seems to be the source text that most news media have copied verbatim.

Paul

Hopefully any delay on DfT making a formal announcement is because they are preoccupied with other matters... Nonetheless, I'd have thought the Minister would see this as a positive piece of news on rail franchises so would be keen to get it out there?  But the current low profile, combined with the apparent significant increase in the construction timescale, is a bit disconcerting. I wonder if some irksome conditions have been imposed to prevent disturbance to the bats and horses, e.g. work only permitted at particular times of year, etc,  maybe it all has to be done by hand with picks and shovels...!

I don't think there's any indication that construction timescales have significantly increased though? 

Back when they suggested construction would start in summer 2011, that had anticipated a summer 2010 TWA inquiry - but that didn't actually start until November 2010 - and even then lasted significantly longer than expected. So I'd suggest that even if the first inquiry had resulted in the OK, the start of work would have been delayed already by about a year to summer 2012, and with an assumed 12 - 15 months construction time, (and erring towards the latter), would have meant the earliest possible timetable change to introduce the service would have theoretically been that of Dec 2013, yet they planned that services would only start at the end of 2014.

If their claim to be running trains in 2015 is accurate, then it seems to me that although there's been almost two years delay in the inquiry process, the project is not actually running two years to the right...

Paul   

Maybe I'd misunderstood the implication of earlier quote expecting a 12 to 15 month construction time, which from now would mean opening in 2014..?

It's likely there'd be a good few months of live testing and driver training as well on top of construction (and testing).  As a current example, the extension of the LO network from the ELL round to Clapham Junction only involves a relatively short new railway linking existing sections, but although the construction phase finished in May this year, services don't actually start until December.

Paul

Good point. Hopefully this is all on track now then. Will be good to see progress.

Ah, thanks for that, Paul.  Mind you, if that doesn't qualify as 'news' then I don't know what does!  The reference to 'joint project approach' reference hopefully means the East-West Rail elements will be completed at the same time to avoid more work a couple of years later.

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-given-green-light-build-new-rail-line-between-oxford-and-london (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-given-green-light-build-new-rail-line-between-oxford-and-london)

Event starts at 18:30 (probably light refreshments), talk starts 19:00. The event is free and open to all, but registration is required.

Details and registration link at http://www.theiet.org/local/uk/thames/oxon/evergreen-project.cfm (http://www.theiet.org/local/uk/thames/oxon/evergreen-project.cfm)

===

Evergreen 3 Project Free event

Lecture
Stephen Barker of Chiltern Railways will present a talk on the Evergreen 3 Project. Chiltern Railways is proposing to construct a new railway (including the reconstruction of an existing railway) between Bicester and Oxford.

Speaker(s)
Stephen Barker, Chiltern Railways
Date & Time
12 December 2012
18:30 - Registration
19:00 - Lecture
iCalendar Entry (What's this?)

Location
Oxford Brookes University
Headington Campus
Oxford, UK

Organiser
The IET Oxfordshire Network

About this event
Chiltern Railways is proposing to construct a new railway (including the reconstruction of an existing railway) between Bicester and Oxford, together with the construction or reconstruction of stations at Bicester Town, Islip, Water Eaton and Oxford. These improvements will facilitate the operation of direct railway services between London Marylebone, High Wycombe, Bicester Town and Oxford.

The following topics will be covered:
Chiltern Railways ^ who we are, and why we are undertaking the project
Overview of the Bicester ^ Oxford scheme ^ what it is and what it aims to deliver
Development of the scheme
Details of the engineering features of the scheme
The Transport & Works Act Order process
Scheme challenges ^ with a particular focus on the ecological issues that we have had to deal with
Progress to date and programme going forward
Registration
Please complete the registration process to be part of this lecture.

===

The Sos decision letter on this will appear on the Daft website shortly.
I asked why it had not appeared on Friday, 48 hours after the announcement was made. They are just getting round to it now. Anyone would think they had other things on their mind....

I've heard it said that currently at the DfT the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing. I think it's worse than that. The thumb of the left hand doesn't know what the index finger of the left hand is doing.  ::) ;) ;D

.... and worse than that the ring finger on the left hand doesn't know the left hand has been separated from the right  ;D

The Inspector's report and SoS's letter authorising the TWA have finally appeared on the DfT's website.

You can view them both here:

http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/chiltern-second-addendum/ (http://www.dft.gov.uk/publications/chiltern-second-addendum/)

As with the previous documents, a read through them will adequately demonstrate why it takes so bloody long and costs so much to get anything done in this country.  The fact that so much fuss can be made out of so little (to, in effect, make improvements to an existing railway), depresses me to be honest!

Still, the correct (and almost inevitable) decision has finally been reached, and I understand main construction work is scheduled to start next Summer.  Though I'm sure a few objectors will still try to make hay out of their last throw of the dice:

RIGHT TO CHALLENGE ORDERS MADE UNDER THE TWA
Any person who is aggrieved by the making of a TWA Order may challenge its validity, or the validity of any provision in it, on the ground that ^
it is not within the powers of the TWA, or
any requirement imposed by or under the TWA or the Tribunals and Inquiries Act 1992 has not been complied with.
Any such challenge may be made, by application to the High Court, within the period of 42 days from the day on which notice of this determination is published in the London Gazette as required by section 14(1)(b) of the TWA. This notice is expected to be published within three working days of the date of this decision letter.

One final thing, I hadn't realised it until reading through the documents, but it is International Year Of The Bat apparently: 

http://batsnbikes.wordpress.com/2012/01/15/2012-international-year-of-the-bat/ (http://batsnbikes.wordpress.com/2012/01/15/2012-international-year-of-the-bat/)   ;D

I attended this event last night. An excellent presentation by Stephen Baker of Chiltern Railways.

He went through the business reasons behind Chilterns decision, adapting their design to accommodate EW Rail, future freight and electrification also the proposed changes at Oxford.  They have eliminated all but one of the level crossings on the route.

He also went through Chilterns rational for going through the Transports Works Act process and not just using the permitted development rights, the pain they went through with the public enquires and the fact there is a last minute challenge through the Judicial Review they are going through at the moment (although not specific details given for legal reasons)

If you get the opportunity to attend any events where this presentation is being delivered it is well worth it

Thanks for giving us that update, Electric train.  :)

Were there any links to the slides or presentation notes provided?

There may be up-to-date news on the commencement of works at OBRAG's AGM on 17th January.

Notice is here (http://www.obrag.org.uk/421/obrag-agm-2013/)

That would be nice - given that the Evergreen 3 website still has no mention of anything since giving details of the re-opening of the enquiry last May!  :-\

From the Buckingham Advertiser (http://www.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/community/rail-barriers-down-24-minutes-per-hour-1-4697691):

Good to see the projects are being combined, as returning to complete Phase 2 just a couple of years later would not have been a good use of resources.  Do we know more about timescales yet?  Date of closure?  Was anything further discussed at the OBRAG AGM which I'd hoped to attend but couldn't make it.

No, nothing.

The judicial review still has to take place. OBRAG is placing detailed Qs to Nr/EWR/Chiltern through a NR press rep, and we'll wait & see if they collectively respond.

The NR press guy thought they would. I'm sceptical they'll say anything more until the review is cleared

Do we have a date for that yet?

I have just searched to find a reference to this action and its reasons for application but drew a blank (other than the previous ones that have been dealt with) - does anyone have access to a copy of the application?  I assume it's the bats again, but who knows, not I anyway?   :( 

On that subject, am I right in thinking that Wolvercote tunnel has to have single track?  It does not seem very sensible to me.  I know of a road scheme that was abandoned and orders for it revoked, where an old ruined cottage, used by bats, was demolished,as it stood in the way of the proposed road.  Prior to that, the H.A. paid for a 'cottage' to be built next door to it, but off line from the proposed scheme of course to which it was hoped that the bats would transfer.  I checked recently with the Vincent Trust, which was charged with (and paid for, I assume) with the job of effecting a transfer of said bats and they confirmed that the bats were now using the new facility very happily.

I just wonder if this information could be useful to Chiltern or the SoS, depending on whom the action has been brought against.  If any of you of the line promotion groups are in contact I will happily provide details (or 'particulars' as the GW would have it).   ;)

No date set that I've heard of, nor had the NR guy.

Not a public document(s), as not a criminal case, but privately brought action. So only needs serving on 'defendents'.

I think some pax know who the judge dealing with this is.

Not bats, but working methods/detail I think. Again, no one being open anout it. There's another case affecting the diwn North Oxford Goods Loop bring converted to passenger use....

Not at all.  The Wolvercot tunnel work to allow for double track and W10/12 gauge clearance was going to be done during the EG3 work, but being separately funded by the DfT.  Chiltern's agreed plans (ie prior to East West Rail being confirmed), did not need double track through the tunnel to run the 2 tph each way timetable, but the current single track was going to be slewed to one side (and the trackbed lowered) as part of the work, so that the second track could be installed in future without another blockade.

From the TWA order inquiry statement:


Paul

4.104 9above) Can't be right seems far too sensible or am I just being my usual cynical self.

It's been pretty consistent throughout the Evergreen 3 published info from what I can see.

I think NR (and BR before them) usually do allow for future possibilities such as OHLE if they can be added at reasonable cost to what is needed anyway.  One of their engineers told me a while back that all the new footbridges going in around the SE (in the third rail area) all provide clearance for OHLE as designed...

Paul

Many thanks Paul, it was clearly the point about Evergreen 3 that had stuck in my memory.  Very pleased to hear the outcome and thanks for the trouble you have taken. 

Last I heard was that the people who are activists about the local common were making negative noises about the latest proposals for full upgrade and electrification but I can't really see what they can do about it as development will surely be within existing curtilage.  I don't think planning consent is needed in that case as there is no change of use.

Complaining about electrification now, after all that time spent by the TWA inquiry dealing with those objecting to noisy DMUs earlier, looks like desperation to me, but I suppose it's par for the course.

Paul

No doubt there will be complaints that electromagnetic fields will give them cancer... How many more years delay can be caused by spurious complaints from people who knowingly moved next to a railway line ?

Nothing to do with electrification.

As I understand it, this relates to an objector that was heard at the original enquiry, and who considers his objections to have been incorrectly dismissed by the Inspector.

Ah, so once the judge has agreed with the inspector, the complaint will no doubt be about the judicial review process. What next, the ECHR, or maybe the UN?   ::)

Paul

The next step would be the Court of Appeal if the judges gives permission, or the Supreme Court if he does not. Whoever takes such a step would need to be very rich, or very poor and eligible for legal aid. Let's hope it doesn't go that far.

The Judicial Review can only be on original objections, if electrification was not raised as an objection at the original public enquiry it cannot be raised in a JR.  My feeling is the objector just does not want trains running at all and would be quite happy to see the line close completely.

From the IET even given by Chiltern before Xmas they could have opted for "permissible rights" however this would have made it difficult to acquire the land required for bridges to close level crossings, for embankment reinforcement, new maintenance accesses etc also the cord at Bicester would a need PW Act any way.

The Evergreen scheme also takes into account the redevelopment of Oxford Stn that is why they are not doing all the work they planned to do north of Oxford Stn

I think I veered off the subject slightly there, but it wasn't really intended to suggest the present judicial review was about electrification.  I think that in post #113 swrural is only suggesting that further complaints, from similar sources, about East West rail and electrification are probable, not that it is an aspect of the current judicial review.

Paul

Hopefully this Judicial Review will be swiftly dealt with.  Will the East-West Rail scheme require a TWA?  There will no doubt be the same delays and nonsense if it does!  ::)

If I were to say that the objector is part of the road lobby, it might put things in perspective. He's also on Legal Aid & this is costing the taxpayer a lot of money.

NR hasn't yet determined which way it will apply for rights for EWR work yet - the presentation at the OBRAG meeting covered this saying there are three options being discussed.

That mystifies me (road lobby bit).  Can you not safely name him please (bound to be a him) so one can google it and learn more?  I must confess, as an environmental campaigner myself (CPRE), I am not against people getting legal aid to fight a case on principle.  I think that unlawful practice, especially by large organisations, should be challenged (like the WCML franchise affair for instance).  So whether this A.N. Other has a case or not will soon emerge, hopefully.  My mystification centres on what a petrol head has against railways, in this case, unless A.N. Other is an RHA member (thus my curiosity).
 
Yes, on my previous post, I meant new possible objections (to the electric spine and East West part) but wondered if those developments needed any planning consent (leaving aside new station buildings and so on).

I noticed that "Transport Watch" was an objector in the public inquiry, though I don't think the individual behind it is representative of any wider lobby group.

If this really is the infamous Mr Withrington, he seems to object as a matter of course to anyything regarding railways.  I thought the inspector had seen through his fairly ridiculous proposals and reported as such?

Paul

That's him....he did, but Witherington is still entitled to take it higher, unfortunately. And he does have the larger road lobby behind him.

The inspector's original report does seem to adequately rebut his points IMHO, but then I'm no expert in the minutae like Withrington obviously thinks he is. AIUI he tried to make out that EG3 was really a DB sponsored scheme to improve DBS's freight capability, but then also proposed that the whole route to Marylebone should be turned into a coach route.

The Inspectors original report is here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/4487/twa-10-app-01-report.pdf

... so if anyone is interested in looking up Withrington's summarised case it's on page 178 et seq.

Paul

 

Thanks Paul, I will.  Could both of you agree on the spelling of Withrington, this or the other  please?

My experience of hearing evidence like the coach route to Marylebone is that it destroys credibility of objectors.

Mind you, that was apparently DfT policy at one time, whoops!

I am answering my own question (it's Withrington).

Here is the link of his opponents.

 http://www.engage-oxford.org.uk/content/evergreen3-public-enquiry-update-paul-withrington-transport-watch

Will read with interest.  In fact this was dealt with earlier in the thread (early 2011). 

Gosh, this made my blood boil, particularly if he is getting legal aid. He doesn't even live anywhere near the area (Northampton).

There are some wonderful inconsistencies in his statement of case. At one point he complains that 4 or 5 freight trains a day will do nothing to impact road traffic and later on speculates that a noisy freight train every six minutes would shatter the peace of those living next to the line. And cutting and pasting Chiltern's rolling stock fleet from Wikipedia into the case, and then presuming that their costs will be consistent with High Speed Rail stock elsewhere was easily shot down by Chiltern on both counts.

Hopefully the fact that the first phase is now going to be tied in with EWR means that the  delay caused by the JR will be minimal, due to the need to replan.

Yes, I have had a look now.  Incidentally the initial link I gave came from a fellow supporter organisation, not opponents as I stated, but that linked to the same address as given before.

I read his opening which, after stating some impressive qualifications and job history, launched into unremitting hyperbole.  I then looked at his 'coach route' proposals and stumbled on so many unfounded assertions and not-thought-through analyses.  It must have been difficult for the Inspector do deal with all this verbiage and 'summarily' was probably safer than in detail.  However perhaps that is the substance of the JR application, as dealing with the fantastic minutiae would indeed be a mammoth task, so he will complain of errors of omission probably.

It all reminded me of Dr Dionysis Lardner and I.K. Brunel in front of the Lords committee on Box tunnel.  The latter had a few devastating scientifically-sound retorts and the committee who came down on Brunel's side did not have to worry about judicial review of course.

I have read through many of the arguments raised by the objector. The only possible reason for them that I can think of is that he has a barrister in the family. The arguments he puts forward are riddled with anomaly and incorrect assumption, but he, like anyone else, is entitled to seek judicial review of any exercise of power by a minister or other statutory body. Whether he will succeed is of course entirely another matter. Much of his case is based on a secret plan to use the route for intensive freight operations, entirely rebutted by Chiltern, and with no evidence to the contrary. Judges don't like unfounded conspiracy theories.

I can't figure out what his ground for review is by looking at the grandly drafted "Conclusions", and assume he wants the judge to conclude that the Secretary of State, in allowing the scheme, acted in a way which any reasonable person would conclude to be irrational. If that it is the case, then it's a bit rich.

Of the many put-downs by Chiltern of his barrack-room accountant approach to the relative costs of road and rail, this one is my favourite:

Source: http://www.engage-oxford.org.uk/sites/engage-oxford.org.uk/files/CRCL-R-OBJ319%20Withrington.pdf

Two paragraphs prior to that, Chiltern point out that aound the world, busways are being converted to rail, or closed. The day of the busway has come and gone, which is why at last Bristol has started to build one.  >:(

The phrase vexatious litigant comes to mind.

It does to me also, although I doubt it would do much more than offer the man the use of an even bigger soap box, and a supply of willing proxies to take his place.

No less a person than the MP for Witney, the Rt Hon David Cameron, expressed frustration at the expensive and endless uses of judicial review in holding up infrastructure projects. He has said he will try to change the law to make such challenges harder to mount, but is worried his regulations may be overturned on, er, judicial review.

I have said elsewhere within this noble coffee shop that there is a reason why the former dictatorships in Europe enjoy more comprehensive public transport than here. We should really enjoy our democracy and the power it gives to the common man to object to things we don't like, without risking being taken out and shot. The Planning Inspector will have given Mr W a good listening to, steering him back to the point should he stray into other matters, before ignoring his specious and flawed arguments. Judges are not so indulgent, and you annoy them at your peril. However, let us not lose sight of the fact that, however meritorious the scheme, the Secretary of State approved it against the recommendation of the inquiry. Whilst Chiltern had convinced her that they had mitigated the issues cited by the inspector, it does give the opponent the impression that it must have been a close call, so worth a challenge.

Hurry up, your Honour!

Modsw - can wesplit thissection away into another thread - wehave somwhat got away from the topic!

Chiltern said yesterday that they have asked the judge to expedite his decision, and they should find out if he has granted this request within a fortnight. If so, they should get a decision before the end of March, which is the point at which any further delay will also delay the route opening by Chiltern from the 2015 target date.

Since EWR got the ok, the blockade has now gone from 9-12 months to a 122-18 month blockade. They are not finalising the work programme until the judicial review is sorted. A meeting the stakeholders over arrangements for the blockade should hopefully be held in March.

I think I got your meaning, ChrisB, so I have indeed split off quite a few posts from this topic and put them in a new topic, at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=11922.0  :)

Seems as though the protester was mis-identified. Apologies for repeating the rror here.

More can be found here, including the news if you read carefully that the request to spededily determine the judicial review appears to have been granted, and a decision is due in a couple of weeks. If so, line will be closed, according to Chiltern, from the May timetable change date.

Oxford Mail (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/10226360.Sole_campaigner_objects_to_London_rail_link_plans/)

Thanks for that, Chris.  Hopefully they'll get over this final hurdle and get the the work started in May - just shows what one stubborn 'dude' who's probably on legal aid can do to spoil things for everyone.

Pretty certain he's being funded by the road lobby....

If he's receiving such funding then he may well be in breach of the income rules for claiming state benefits.

Not if they pay the bill directly....

By saying, "pretty certain" ChrisB, I assume you have some evidence that Mr Feeney's legal bills are being picked up by the road lobby? if not, I think it best to make that clear.

It could be a dangerous accusation to make if it's baseless.

Also, who would be this 'road lobby'?



 

Which is why I'm happy with the statement. Undefined, it gives an idea of who may be behind the law sui, without requiring further details which may well be sub-judice.

Mods. If you're not happy, fine to do what you want.

The chairman of the Oxford--Bicester Rail Action Group has told the Oxford Times of his concern that there is no timetable for the works to upgrade the existing route. He seems to think that it will now take much longer as part of a global project than it would if done as a purely local initiative.

http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/10244869.Commuter_outrage_at__lack_of_plan__for_rail_upgrade/?ref=erec

Ian East is correct.

It's gone from being a 9-12 month line closure to a 18-24 month line closure!

My guess the delay in publishing the plans revolves around the having to wait for JR to conclude, NR or Chiltern would not want  prejudice the JR by just steam rolling ahead by publishing a plan, which could get altered / delayed by the JR.

From the IET event back in Nov 12 Chiltern could just agree to having the work done to suit their planned service which would only result in disruption when EW Rail project starts, they did say they were working with NR to reduce the line closure to a minimum.

I know its painful for the local supports of the line many of them fought to get the service back and then enhanced to see the line shut however the end result will leave them with a train service the could never have dreamt of in their wildest dreams; NR is perhaps lacking in not consulting more but the project team is possibly not fully staffed as yet.

JR - Judicial Review.

I have a certain expertise. Incapacity Benefit is not income based, except for some pensions, and would not be affected, unless it gave rise to doubt about incapacity for work. Receipt of Incapacity Benefit does not give automatic entitlement to Legal Aid.


In this case, income related benefits such as Income Support or Employment and Support Allowance would be unaffected too.


I wouldn't worry too much, BNM. Legal Aid isn't available for defamation cases.

Are you sure about that?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/feb/15/foodanddrink

You've got to move with the times...

https://www.gov.uk/legal-aid/what-youll-get

I think a distinction is drawn between instigating a case and defending yourself against one. A lot has changed since that Guardian article was written in 2005, with the specific aim of cutting the bill to the taxpayer. In any case, I haven't said anything defamatory. He might not have a firm grasp of the essentials of efficient public transport, but he knows his environmental law.

Just been to Oxford and picked up the latest Oxford Times. Apparently some guy is going to take Network Rail to court over the bats in Wolvercote Tunnel and potential vibration issues.

I know these issues have been commented on before but as I read the report Network Rail are about to start work on the upgrade of the line. I notice some equipment in the form of diggers and piles of ballast or gravel appears to have arrived at the site of the new Kidlington station by the park and ride - unless this stuff is there for some other purpose. Mind you it may be the Oxford Times is wrong - there's another piece in this week's edition (which is nothing to do with railways) which is complete balderdash.

Somebody else has probably commented already by why are we allowing the bats (who presumably arrived after the tunnel was built) to hold things up? And surely vibration was an issue when the line was built - the houses round there aren't that modern. Seems similar to the tree problem along Port Meadow (see other thread).

The current hold up is only tangentially to do with bats. 

The sole remaining objector is complaining about the procedure used to allow the project to take place, he seems to disagree with the decision making by DfT, Chiltern, and Natural England to allow the project to be built whilst allowing for the presence of bats.

I don't think Network Rail are a party to the latest case either. 

Paul 

Mind you, I understand the guy in question has been to the High Court over a planning matter before and he lost. He has "form".

Have you come to this topic late Stebbo, all this is discussed on the previous page?

Paul

Perhaps - I don't visit this site every day I'm afraid and I certainly don't carry i-phones or other paraphernalia that allow me to log-in 24/7 (even if I wanted to). And although the Oxford Times is published on Thursday, I only happened to buy it today. I know the bats etc is "old news" but I read this morning about the legal challenge.

Hopefully, you've read rhis thread now & have caught up?

Judicial review decision should be sometime in March to allow a start in early May. Still nowt about line closure length & alternatives for what could be anything up to 18 months.

http://m.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/news/business/track-clearance-work-starts-near-bicester-1-4841860

I don't understand why the OBRAG chap is reportedly suggesting NR have no plans for the work, and is therefore supposedly 'complaining'.

Not making something publicly available doesn't mean it doesn't exist, by any stretch of the imagination. 

Paul

I'm sure it does exist, but they're playing safe.

Reference what Ian is also after is the RRS (is that in the abbreviation list - it should be - Rail Replacement Service).

Now this is going to be the same whether the closure is in 5 weeks or 15 weeks. He wants it released so that all the commuters can start planning their most effective route to work. So why not release it, even if only to the OBRAG committee?

The RRS will involve more than just replacement buses - likely to include trains via Bicester North & Banbury, as well as hopefully being allowed to join different service buses too. The line will be shut for at least 18 months (not just a week) and I also feel that for that length of disruption -

a) Pax are entitled to some notice as to their options - a couple of weeks or so is not enough time to set-up car-shares etc should all the alternatives on offer not be suitable, for example) - and if that option suits some, shouldn't they be able to get a refund on part-used seasons (without deductions!)

b) To negotiate for better options should only a RRS bus service be offered.

THis ought to be on offer from the TOC....

All the clearance work NR are doing will be classed as a maintenance activity as such will not prejudice the Judicial Review.  NR are quite rightly not publishing their program of works because the plaintive in the Judicial Review may use it the argument against the project.

BBC Radio Oxford had a piece this morning about Water Eaton Parkway & the likely traffic congestion.


Didn't catch it myself, but prob on the iplayer.

If there are concerns they should be addressed at the TWA Order inquiry.

Ah but,  that's already happened I hear - so why don't Radio Oxford realise that?

Paul

Because its sweet-FA to do with the works within the rail envelope? :-)

Part of the TWA submission included details of proposed traffic control measures immediately surrounding the new railway station though, didn't it?  That would obviously affect traffic levels and aims to mitigate the increase in traffic heading to the site.

The junction that leads directly to it, yes.

But as I understand it, it wasn't mandatory info.

Here's some specimen paragraphs from the inspector's report:


So I hope Radio Oxford aren't trying to trigger a further set of late objections.  Just what is the point of their story?

Paul

I suspect its the radio station simply reporting the concerns of local residents, rather than stiring things up...

Hopefully - but it would be good if they could inform as well as entertain...

"Local residents, voicing concerns about the traffic implications of the expanded Park and Ride site, were apparently unaware that the relevant highway authorities had already approved the plans."

Paul

Maybe they did - I didn't hear the broadcast, and if you're interested, I'm sure its on Radio iplayer.

I wonder if the analysis was based on the existing road layout.....a layout which it is proposed to alter with the diversion of significant traffic flows from the A40 eastbound directly to the frieze way roundabout with a link road? This will create a directly link into the Water Eaton site from the west without going via the Wolvercote and Peartree junctions which are solid from 0730 onwards but has a negative effect on the southbound A44 traffic.

Here's hoping that both schemes progress together and are analysed together.

The objection seems to be that the Watereaton station will attract more visitors over and above the existing City P & R users increasing the traffic outside on the Kidlington/Oxford road thus lengthening queuing and delays. What the objector seems to have forgotten is that with a 30 minute frequency rail service between Bicester and Oxford, a lot of motorists are likely to abandon their car and get on the train to get to work in Oxford. It will certainly save the daily commuter a lot of time over driving. Therefore to some extent more motorists driving to Watereaton to go by train to London will be offset by fewer motorists on the road between Bicester and Oxford. The question remaining is therefore, will one change of flow offset the other?

There is a debate here about an 'objection'.

Objection to what?  All I have read, reading back through the thread, is a local radio programme article without any reference to something that has to be sorted out through legal or planning processes.

However, taking the issue on board, any jams caused by park and ride access is an argument for increasing the frequency of the service from the park and ride, *not* not building the facility in the first place.

Reported to me....from someone present at he meeting

I knew that, and I live about 80 miles away. It is possible to live in an idyllic beauty spot, next door to a proposed sewage plant, incinerator, and 12-lane motorway, yet know nothing about it. It is more difficult now than when an advert in the London Gazette fulfilled the need for consultation in many cases. Maybe they do it differently in the Chilterns. In Bristol, the local planners tell us what we want, ignore the howls of protest, then go ahead anyway, sparking planning inquiries, court cases, and even direct action. Come election time, it gives candidates for the council something to hang an otherwise spurious and boring campaign on, but at least we all knew about the project. Because if we didn't before, someone would tell us. We take an interest in these things.

Don't we?

Any news on this yet?  The Evergreen 3 site is still well out of date, but Chiltern's website links to the new timetable download currently aren't working, so I can't see if their timetable mentions any closure from Oxford to Bicester during the summer timetable - however the journey planners seem to think that trains will still be running.

The new Chiltern TT is here (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/sites/default/files/Timetable%2019th%20May%202013%20large%20print_0.pdf) in pdf format.

It does mention that the line closure is due within the life of the TT, so before 7 December.

The judge did make a quick appearance earlier this month - just said something like "Right, I'll take a look at this", banged his gavel & walked out....

So....everyone still waits. Chiltern think a positive judgement might still be able to be appealed, but thought they'd [probably go ahead even if it was. But they definitely are waiting for the review judgement before going ahead with the main works - although earth moving has taken place on the embankment south of Bicester North on the main line recently.

Chiltern have also stated that they'll adhere to the requirement to give 12 clear weeks notice of the line closuire date once a positive judgement is received - but noone knows just how long that'll be.

I tried to prompt them into saying when the absolute cut-off date was for works to commence in time for Oxford services to start in Dec15, but they wouldn't yet be drawn on that. Seeing as talk is of a 2 year closure, and they need to be sure at T-12 for Dec15 timetable release, and of course NR require Dec15 TT bids in by Feb15....this can't be very far away.

Although I guess they can bid the service, and withdraw it before T-12....

Thanks, Chris.  Another appeal?!


Though I get a 'page not available' message from that link...

They think an appeal against Judicial Review is possible, yes. This current appeal is against the Inspector....

re the pdf, interesting. just tried clicking on the copied link in your post and I can access it using IE9

Thanks for that, yes, it does open in IE, but not Firefox!

I too was unable to open it in Firefox. But Chrome was no problem.

Opens in Firefox 20.0.1 / Windows 8

The timetable link works in Chrome for me.

Another appeal is potentially possible but probably unlikely unless it is a complicated case. I haven't looked into the grounds for the judicial review at all so can't comment on how likely it would be, but another appeal is not an automatic right.

There is a thread on the UK Rail forums that gives a lot of useful reference documents in it.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=83073

Just looked at that, but there's nothing new that hasn't been discussed in this thread already.  There are links to the Inspectors report and SofS's approval letter back on page 7, Industry Insider's post #99 etc.

I think in IT terminology you've caused a 'circular reference'?  ;D

Paul

Indeed, if you compare the posting dates/times, some of what's there has likely been picked up from here....

Well it was new to me but thanks for being so grateful. >:(  ;D

There seems t0 be some talk on some other forums that we could get a decision from the judge tommorow.

Not sure if it will actually happen but it might be worth keeping a listen out for.

Annoucement that the challenge has been thrown out so Chiltern can crack on with things

Do you have a link for this please ?

Too soon for the press....

But an email fcrom Graham Cross @ Chiltern....giving some detail on commencement of services. Confirms my earlier post that services commence only as far as Water Eaton in 2015, extending to Oxford in 2016.

All appears achievable, I must admit though that phasing the work so that Water Eaton is the terminus for about 9 months had passed me by here.  Perhaps ChrisB you mentioned it in another forum?   

There seems to have been an implied possibility, to do with de-conflicting with other work at Oxford - but I don't think it was ever explicitly stated.

Nevertheless it is very good news.

Paul

Chiltern now want to start earning from it ASAP, as they are well behind schedule and therefore budget.

Now in the Oxford Mail (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/10426905.New_Oxford_London_rail_link_given_go_ahead/) online

I'd heard the Water Eaton idea as a rumour a few times, but then again I hear lots of rumours!  ;)

So pleased that this latest appeal has failed, though I'm sure Mr. Feeney will appeal the appeal as he seems like the sort of bloke who just won't go away - still, in three years from now the link will hopefully be open, paving the way for East West Rail a couple of years later, without a further closure as was originally envisaged.

Chiltern commented to the Passenger Board that, even if he appeals the review decision, they are minded to continue with the work....unless told otherwise by a judge.

East West Rail tweeted -

Excellent news for commuters. About time too, how long has this been going on for now? Feels like years...

The only thing is, where are the paths going to come from on the Chiltern line? And I assume the junctions will be flat. I noticed that lots of trees have been axed in Bicester in preparation...

It's a shame Chiltern don't reopen the line via Thame as well. They could open an Oxford South Parkway plus an M40 parkway.

Whilst they're at it. Re open the line via Chinnor to Lewknor Parkway and compete with the coaches.

And then reopen the line up towards Brackley...

Going off at a slight tangent here:  Blimey! Hello again, Btline!!  :o ::) ;D

Yes...welcome back BT line! We have missed your ...errrr.....colourful contributions !

they are doing this because re-opening via Thame was not feasible.

Some of them at least were intended to be diversions of existing services that terminate at places such as Banbury or Bicester Town North.  Others were to be extensions of services terminating nearer London.  I'm pretty sure there was never any expectation of additional services out of Marylebone.

That may have changed but I believe one of the timetable changes within the last couple of years was a pre-cursor to the Oxford services starting.  ChrisB might know more, without spending an hour looking for the track access application again...

Alternatively, we covered the same subject on page 8 of Btline's Chiltern Mainline thread...

Paul

North....


Certainly not in the peaks as there aren't any more slots/platform space.

The post EG3 timetable was creating the trains that would be extended, and also provide the slots for them. Hence the change to clockface timetable & reduction of services in the Chiltern heartlands area

Chris Aldridge - NR Western head honcho spoke at the Cotswold Line Promotion Group (CLPG) AGM on Saturday. His notes included a current lay-out plan for Oxford resignalling.....

Very interesting. No track from Wolvercote Tunnel behind the turbo depot into platforms 4/5 any longer. Just the current layout onto the mailine & Back into a lengthened (I think) platform 3 or the up platform 2. Potential for a further platform 4 to be added, but it seems the current 4/5 are to be removed.

Also, he clearly told me that Chiltern are doing the works to get them to Water Eaton. Once they've got services running to/from WaterEaton, EWR are taking on the work into Oxford, while also working beyond Bicester Town....

That was also stated in a Chiltern Railways presentation at an IET event just before Christmas, what CR required from Watereaton to Oxford would have to be reworked by EWR so for a while CR will run with a slightly reduced timetable.  CR will also do any work necessary to allow EWR to electrify the route (bridge clearances, signal immunity etc)   

By 'slightly reduced' I think you mean 'delayed start'?

Instead of running to Oxford from start odf service in August 2015, they won'treach Oxford now until April 2016 at the earliest. I haven't heard anything about a reduced service strarting then though? Is that what you mean?

I can't see Chiltern starting the Oxford service unless they can run their 2tph service from that date - they're going to want to hit the ground running with their advertising the new service. 1tph or 1.5tph won't draw many pax....

You are probably right Chris the Oxford remodel and EWR works it may well be prudent to hold back running the service.  When I attended the IET event the electrification of EWR was still quite warm off the press.

It will be an interesting few years in the Oxford area

The line from Oxford North Juntion behind Rewley Road Sidings and into two new bay platforms has been out of favour for some time now, as can be seen on the latest proposed diagrams I posted in February on this thread:  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=11850.15 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=11850.15)

I feel that they are still the most likely (and sensible layout).  Platform 3 (current) to be joined by one new bay platform (rather than the two originally envisaged) and an upgraded 'Down Jericho Line' linking North Junction and those platforms.  Chiltern would then predominantly work their 2tph hour service from the one new platform, with the current platform 3 (as well as the other platforms) being available as a back-up.

However, with the recent announcement about Aedas being charged as 'masterplanners' for the Oxford station area, who knows, this might all change again!  http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Masterplanners-appointed-for-the-proposed-redevelopment-of-Oxford-station-1d0f.aspx (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Masterplanners-appointed-for-the-proposed-redevelopment-of-Oxford-station-1d0f.aspx)

mmmmm looks like they are still play with GRIP 3 stuff (option selection)

Thanks - the additional bay platform isn't yet part of the resignalling plans and is just an option, according to Chris Aldridge on Saturday. i.e. a possible future option, imho, possibly if/when the new through up platform is installed.

EWR services are not terminating in Oxford but will all use the up through platform to go on somewhere south of Oxford (Reading/Swindon) - leaving Chiltern using platform 3 - so 4 movements an hour from there meaning the odd Banbury could also be accomodated, I guess.

Probably also means no extended layovers for Chiltern - straight in, load/unload & out again. The original plans incorporated their own station entrance, ticket office and associated kit like drivers accom. I guess the latter could still feature if you had a quick driver changeover.

Recall a suggestion somewhere that EWR could terminate many services at Didcot bringing Platform 5 into greater use which is relatively lightly used, in the process taking over some/most of the stoppers between Oxford and Didcot. Whether this was an 'official' suggestion or someone's own speculation I can't remember though - or indeed how popular that would be for people going from say Goring to Oxford.

Separate train crew messing and welfare is not favoured, likewise entrances and ticket offices for National Rail services.

The EWR website shows services through to Reading which if the journey times are reasonable to Aylesbury and Milton Keynes will become a popular commute 

It would be easier to just join the EWR services to the existing FGW stopping services from Paddington, now that it's full electrification throughout, rather than an interloping DMU on an electric railway.  Perhaps announce them differently at Paddington, but as Milton Keynes or Bedford services from Reading, or something like that.  

The implication of the service patterns shown in the presentation referred to in post #8 of the Oxford redevelopment thread:  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=11850.0  is certainly that existing services will now be joined.

Paul

Paul don't forget EWR is being electrified

That's what I just wrote - 'full electrification throughout'...  ???

When GW electrification was news, EWR would still have been DMUs. Electrifying both must inevitably lead to better through service possibilities, is what I meant.

Paul

And an ideal chance to provide a proper East-West Rail link, by running the Bedford service to/from Bristol in my opinion.  Running it to replace the stopping service to/from Reading will lead to pretty rubbish journey times on through journeys - which, especially post Crossrail, will probably be bettered from Reading to Bedford via London, but I suppose Reading/Didcot will be better destinations than just Oxford, which is why the East-West Rail Consortium have taken that view over the last few years.


Do you mean the new down platform?  Cost and hassle wise installing a new up platform (although allowed for passively in the diagrams) would involve demolishing the concourse - much more likely is a new down platform running behind platform 2 as described in the diagram which would only use land vacated by the closure of Oxford Panel and much less important buildings.  As I said, I think the layout in the diagrams is pretty good:  A new down platform, the current platform 2 becoming bi-directional, an extended bay and new north facing bay, together with revised track layouts and increased speeds - it ticks all the boxes it can now that the station looks like it is staying in its current location.

One final point regarding the development of Oxford station, as ChrisB says, should there just be an extended Platform 3, turnround timings will have to be very short in order to make that work, and, even if it becomes bi-directionally signalled the Jericho Passenger Loop is quite restrictive in that a train arriving/departing from Platform 3 cannot do so at the same time a train arrives/departs from Platform 1.  I can see performance issues in trying to squeeze those extra trains in, even with short dwell times.

I agree running to Bristol would provide a really useful service. The reason the previous Bristol to Oxford service ceased was allegedly down to improving reliability. With 100mph emu stock and the loss of coal traffic to Didcot I would imagine this is less of an issue now.

There would then inevitably be pressure to reopen other stations on the main line, such as Corsham, Royal WB, and maybe Wantage Rd, though these would then make journey times less attractive, and reintroduce the pathing problems eased by having 100mph emu's.

What is the absolute limit for paths on the two track section between Swindon and Foxhall Junction? Can a 100-110mph service to Oxford be slotted in between the 125mph services from Bristol/South Wales/Cheltenham-London?

Of the latter there are currently 4tph with a fifth every two hours. That is set to increase with IEP to 6/7tph.

Not to forget the odd freight path as well.

Should four-tracking the GWML between Didcot and Swindon not be considered?

At 100mph, emu's only lose 7.5 seconds per mile against 125mph running, so 8 miles for a minute lost, thus no more than 3 minutes maximum.  I'd have thought one path an hour could easily be slotted in, given the considerable reduction in freight , as those paths will have been the biggest user of capacity.

I agree, I'd have thought a 100mph capable EMU service (or even 110mph as looks increasingly likely to be the stock we end up with), could be pathed OK between Swindon and Foxhall, indeed it might be the Chippenham/Bath/Bristol corridor that proves more difficult in that respect.  

That would, as 'John R' says, be the best chance new stations like Corsham, Wootton Bassett and Grove/Wantage have of ever opening as it would be an ideal service to stop at those stations. Grove/Wantage could be built on the 4-track section that already exists to allow faster services to overtake - though a two-track railway might make things a bit more problematic at the other potential stations, though with a of planning and a bit of money a similar looped station could be built at Wootton Bassett.

A through Bristol to Bedford hourly electric service via Oxford would open up so many more journey opportunities, and, if you ask me, is a much more compelling prospect than an all stations Reading to Oxford and onwards to Bedford service.  By all means run the other Milton Keynes service to/from Didcot or Reading, but Bristol to Bedford (and eventually Cambridge/Norwich) ticks so many boxes.

I think I understand - using the left turn at Foxhall Junction to avoid having to call at Didcot and turn back. I believe the Bristol - Oxford route lasted 4 years until 2004(?), when the SRA asked for it to be closed to avoid congestion. Whether Bristol to Oxford could again be viable is not clear, as there are few intermediate stations and not many people going the full journey. Weston s Mare to Bedford could certainly work, though.

As for four-tracking Swindon to Didcot, I think at some point that will become inevitable. IEP services to Oxford, Bristol, and South Wales, more local services, and an increase in freight paths - partly offset by the end of coal trains to Didcot power station - will mean something will have to be done. But let's have Four Track, Now between Temple Meads and Filton Bank. After that, we can look at Four Track, Then from Swindon.

I was just having a quick squizz on google maps to see what this would entail, and was rather delighted to see  this (http://goo.gl/maps/6Bfp2) trundling down the track...

The colour, outline and shadow of that kettle makes it look suspiciously like 60163 Tornado.

Only hauling one though....

I do think there is a suitable market out there.  Not only is there the market for direct journeys between Bristol/Bath and Swindon to Oxford that the old Turbo service provided, but this new service would build on that by also providing direct links from those stations to Bicester Village (and Bicester itself), as well as links to the WCML and MML at Bletchley/Milton Keynes/Bedford meaning one easy change to get to places like Northampton and Luton which are poorly served by rail from the west as it stands.


Though it won't be long before it comes across a log jam of HST's a bit further down the track by Trow Lane Farm.   ;)

No, I did mean up platform - passively provisioned to destroy the concourse, yes.

It is marked as a dotted line on the plans if you look carefully - and as already recognised, Oxford station is about to be redesigned/rebuilt - so probably taking this into account.

The additional bay platform (in red on that plan) is also for that stage. Not to be installed currently when the station is resignalled/rebuilt, but passively allowed for in case it is needed. So not part of the EWR works either. The through up extra line will use an extended platform 3 route through the concourse, so removing the bay platform - which would be replaced by the new bay platform (marked in red) - They'd be built at the same time.

The resignalling is reducing the headways to Didcot to 3 minutes and to Banbury to 6 minutes.

The extra down platform from what Chris said was likely to be part of the resignalling project, hence it being marked as a solid line on that plan. The widening of the Botley Road bridge will mean it taking 'part of' (Chris's words) the YHA building, so not sure what would be left of that!

Fair enough.  I can't see that happening though.  Would cost far too much, and cause a huge amount of disruption, for far too small a benefit.  My money would be on a final layout similar to that in the diagrams without the dotted line part.  I've been wrong before though, so time will tell...  ;)

Let's wait & see the redesign for the station?....that will give some better idea on the likelihood.

It would probably mean constructing a new station building in front of the present one with an extended bridge to what would be the island platforms then demolishing the existing building to finish the dotted platform.

Notes from a meeting the CLPG had with FGW recently indicates that they seem to be on the same wavelength -


I had a brief meeting with Oxford station management last night - it seems as though the current date for the demise of Oxford signalbox (and thuis I guess completion of the resignalling) - April 2015. Could the station be redesigned & built by then?....

That would be the likely date when (the serious) work will start not be finished, surely?  As with Reading station, the decommissioning of the panel box allows the land it currently occupies to be used for the down platform loop and the flexibility afforded by the new TVSC at Didcot makes it a lot easier to provide any temporary signalling and track layouts that might be needed in stages before the full rebuilt layout is finished.

In the meantime work could start on areas such as the carriage sidings where the land is available and it won't affect existing signalling much?

Although on a smaller scale, the similarities to Reading are striking; signal box closes; Didcot takes over signalling; land used for platforms; bridges at both ends of station widened; new track north and south of station.  All resulting in a much more flexible station layout and more platforms.

Yes, I think you are right....that puts the work firmly in the next CP period. And why Oxford won't be ready for Chiltern until April 2016....

Just in time for the GWML electrification as well.  Timescales will be very tight though...  :o

Thinking back to the judicial review process, do the judgements ever get reported, or made available online?  I've tried a bit of Googling, but there doesn't seem an obvious place to find the details, only reports that it happened IYSWIM...

Paul 

Try searching on http://www.bailii.org/ (http://www.bailii.org/)

Thanks for the tip but there's nothing coming up with obvious searches.

Paul

It should appear (not present at time of writing this though) on this page (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2013/) in the May 2013 section. Decision Date was 17/05/2013 and the case number you are looking for is [2013] EWHC 1238.

Cases 1237 & 1239 are there already, not sure why this one is still missing.

However, I think there's something attached to this post that you might be interested in  ;D ;D

Interesting read - all about emissions, but then of course so much of the presumed pollution problem will be altered completely with the decision to electrify the whole area during the early years of operations...

Paul

An interesting document.  Point number 58 is my favourite.  :P

Nice and succinct.

Just a shame it doesn't then show...

59.  Banned.

Latest Track Access application from Chiltern is now online, confirming the staged opening mentioned by ChrisB in an earlier post #205:

Closing date of the consultation is two days time, on Friday 26th

Having noticed that short deadline, the 'industry briefing letter' does then explain that they aren't actually consulting anyone, it's just a joint NR/CR application direct to ORR.

Paul

Clearance work on the Oxford-Bicester line at the site of the junction for the new chord to the Chiltern line has now started.

http://www.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/news/business/work-steams-ahead-on-new-bicester-rail-link-1-5339538

Good news.

If Chiltern....a much smaller company than FGW ...can do all this in 3 years...why can't FGW do half the work in double the time on the Portishead line ?

Why? Because Chiltern need this link to improve profits (InterCity rail services can be profitable).

Portishead to Bristol will be a commuter route; commuter routes are almost always non profitable unless they are InterCity.

Until someone (i.e. the government aka the taxpayer) pays FGW to run the services, they won't run them!

Chiltern first announced the proposal in August 08, so it'll have taken around 7 years, or 8 by the time they reach Oxford. And that was with no question regarding the funding of the scheme - just the time taken to go through due process.

It is also the way their 20 year franchise is set up.  Also Chiltern are part of a much larger company ........... DB

Their franchise was uniquely set up, in that the majority of what other TOCs are required to pay the Treasury for their franchise was instead required to be spent on their services & stations to improve their profitability.

Seems to have worked. Shame it wasn't seen as the way ahead for franchising

Yes, I really can't see why! Chiltern have completely transformed the route and are easily the most successful franchise.
They do have competition and clear aims. But the passenger growth from Solihull and Warwick Parkway just says it all. To grab regular commuters from Worcestershire and Shropshire from a single station is amazing.

Just think how good FGW would be if the profits had been invested into the infrastructure, instead of stuffing "fat cat shareholders" and paying premiums to the gov (although the latter do I suppose get reinvested somewhere in rail). Instead the franchise gets stale, additional stops are added to InterCity services to cover stations which should have their own stopping service.

FGW have improved travel in the South West overall, but let's not forget the infamous "Son of Beeching" scandal, when massive service cuts were planned at the beginning of the franchise, the appalling conditions in the Bristol area which provoked two "Fare strikes" and the fact that FGW didn't hesitate to hand the keys back when they were given the opportunity!

You don't seem to get it.  Chiltern have been making profits (though the fat cats in this case are the German taxpayers).  The moneyy that Chiltern have been ploughing back is what would otherwise have gone to the the DfT in premiums.

With the performance of the First Group shares since May, FGW shareholders are more probably emaciated moggy than fat cat.

As I recently pointed out in another thread neither First Group nor the DfT are making money from the FGW franchise.

Chiltern aren't making any money at the moment either. DB are indeed feeding back profits to Germany, but not from Chiltern!

Yes I do! I said that it would be good if FGW's profits were driven back into the railway and not paid in premiums.


Exactly, which brings us very nicely round to what started this conversation off.
Chiltern are opening the railway to Oxford in order to become more profitable. It is a lucrative market (especially Water Eaton Parkway).

That comment also shows the ridiculous fact that UK rail passengers are currently funding the French, German and Dutch state railways!

One could equally argue that the German, French and Dutch railways are subsidising the British railways, whilst the Spanish, Chinese, and even Canadian teachers' pension funds are ploughing billions into our airports.

I thought they were doing it because they had a franchise commitment to do it.

Of course.  They were the first and only TOC to be given their particular type of franchise, before the SRA got cold feet.  Although usually described as a twenty year franchise, according to the online versions of their franchise spec it was always a ten year franchise with an almost guaranteed extension to twenty if certain infrastructure proposals were carried out by certain due dates. 

The idea that they are doing all the Evergreen stuff because they are 'more successful' than the others just doesn't really stand up to the slightest scrutiny, especially as no one else has been given such franchise terms...

Paul

Nowt to do with FGW. Their original franchise held the TT that the DfT wanted them to run, and also specified the stock they could hire in. You can't blame them for not wanting to have to hire additional stock at their own expense? It's a commercial contract that the DfT let.


No, their franchise simply specified that certain sums were to be spent on "services & stations" in their franchise, by certain dates. The projects that Chiltern wanted to do had to be approved by the DfT.

Just how they got the sign-off on Oxford (which isn't part of their original route), I doubt we shall ever know. Agreed it was chosen for the new profit stream - someone managed to persuade them that competition on the Oxford route was a good thing (or else good as a diversionary route when the PAD route is shut)....

Lastly, in my view, Chiltern IS profitable. As some may know, TOCs hire trains from ROSCOEs. Chiltern have admitted in a Passenger Board meeting that they 'hire' the silver sets to themselves (Arriva/DB)! Stop doing that and I suspect Chiltern would a) make a profit and b) pay taxes on that profit to the Govt. Instead, Arriva/DB take the profit out gross rather than after tax.

Remember Starbucks and their taxes? This is DB/Chiltern's. The press got close a while back to this story, but didn't quite make it.

Meanwhile, from yesterday's Oxford Times: (http://www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/10590301.Work_begins_on_cities__new_railway_link/)


We're off!

I am sure that their bid had a commitment to investigate the reopening the line from Princess Risborough through to Cowley and Oxford.  When they found this to be too costly they proposed the Bicester route instead. So a route to Oxford was in a list of projects for consideration, just not via Bicester.

That's what I thought.  Their franchise agreement states:

'The Franchise Operator proposes to open a new route to Oxford, either
between Princes Risborough and Oxford via Wheatley, with new stations at
M40 Junction and South Oxford; or via a new south to east curve at Bicester,
with new stations at Bicester Village and Water Eaton Parkway.'

The Wheatley route was deemed too expensive as there were significant structures on the old alignment, though it would have potentially been quicker than the route via Bicester and would have been useful for the communities of south-east Oxford, Wheatley, and Thame.

Thanks for the memory jog, both.

Here's a snap of the work starting near Gavray Drive, Bicester which will eventually become the new 40mph curve leading to the new Bicester South Junction which will be about 1/4 mile to the left of this picture:

(http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3709/9463133599_4e40fe4301_o.jpg)

Taken from the Chiiltern main line, the line in view is the current freight only branch looking towards Bicester Town.

Nice photo industry insider ;)
I thought that Chiltern were also building a link between Princes Risborough through to Radley and Oxford, do you know if that will still happen?

Dropped at a fairly early stage in favour of what they are building.  They were only ever going to re-open the one route, as per the quoted paragraph in post #260 above.

There were other options looked at and decided against, have a look in this evidence to the TWA enquiry, section 8.4 etc:

http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/uploads/04Oct2010/LON_LIB1-4419611-v1-PoE%20Allan%20Dare%20Final%20%20270910.pdf

Paul

Interesting document, although to long to read it all tho :)
If there is major disruption between Bicester and Oxford, how then would chiltern cope if the route between Princes Risborough and Oxford is not reopened? Will be interesting to see how both Chiltern and East West Rail will channel through the single line at that one tunnel but don't know what its called.

The tunnel (Wolvercot) is being double tracked for EWR now.   Don't forget that Chiltern's TWA evidence (of which the above link is part) pre-dates the final decision to go ahead with EWR.  So although under EG3 the tunnel was going to be left with a single track moved to one side to allow for future doubling, (done in conjunction with alterations for W10 freight clearance) it will now be doubled throughout in one go.  Making the tunnel suitable for double tracking was being funded by DfT in addition to EG3, but that's overtaken by subsequent events now.

If there is disruption preventing Chiltern running long the route they'll always be able to recover their trains via Banbury anyway...

Paul 

Of course, forgot about the route via Banbury... woops
Thankyou

To add, its interesting that its now being doubled tracked, and i am surprised Chiltern got that order from the High Court to continue its work. Its all too easy for even one person to derail the project. Just hope it won't happen again to Chiltern, after all there are the best rail company in the UK...

I thought it was more a matter that they did not get an order to tell them to stop.

Im confused, where does it say that ellen?

Much of the route could be done through permitted development Wolvercote tunnel is an example where NR could have doubled that under PD (only complication was the bats) although Chiltern went down the TWA path for a number of reasons

The Judicial Review did not order Chiltern to commence work on the project. It simply removed the last obstacle that was preventing them starting work.

Thankyou John. Lets hope nothing else will be holding Chiltern back from creating a useful connection between Oxford and Bicester.

Just thought of an idea.
Now that chiltern are constructing the section between Oxford and Bicester, maybe a new project they could start is opening up the princes risborough to oxford route as it could deliver these things;
It could free up further paths on the gwml between paddington and oxford, by operating non stop chiltern express services between London Marylebone and Oxford then on to Worcester/Great Malvern and Hereford. Of course further upgrade work is needed, such as reinstatement of the through tracks through high wycombe, beaconsfield and the ruislip areas. Also with two additional tracks between South Ruislip and West Ruislip could mean that both stations can also get a every 15 minute service, very useful for tube connections!. Just have to see what further upgrades chiltern will do.

Edited just to mention that london marylebone is only 5 minutes away from baker street so virtually the same tube connections are avaliable as at London Paddington (although not sure how many more tube lines there are from Baker Street than Paddington). Guess i should check that one out :)

That was ruled out as too expensive.  See posts #259 and #260.

I also linked to the report giving reasons why not in my earlier post #264.  You then replied that it was too long to read. 

Perhaps you could read it, because waiting a couple of weeks after it's been explained as not happening; and then repeating the same suggestion, isn't going to get anywhere...

Paul

My mistake sorry. :)

Four apiece, I reckon.

I think your right however which tube line is closest to canary wharf, assuming as most commuters travel there?

They don't, though ...


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b06a7f6e-0440-11e3-8aab-00144feab7de.html#axzz2cddsTTYD


https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/services/environment-and-planning/planning/development-and-population-information/employment-and-visitors/Documents/DP_PL_CityofLondonWorkforceTravelSectionCInternet[1].pdf

The City data is old, but it's not going to have gone down by 75%!    That report also show you where people commute from.     For every 1 who commutes to Docklands, 3 commute into the City itself.   Now - how many go to Westminster ...

Hmm, thats interesting.
Well who ever travels to westminster may want a direct crossrail service, but opps there wont be one. Oh dear thats a shocker ;D

James - your surname isn't Passant, is it?

I just saw this piece about the Borders Railway:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-23973127

Does it make you think that the poor old bats don't rate such vocal objections if people in the locality actually want the railway to happen?

Paul

It did make me think that at first, Paul7755, even though we know of a few people against the plan.

Later, I realised that is demonstrates the correct approach to the problem. The tunnel is a defined space, and was surveyed for evidence of breeding activity. If there had been, it would have been more difficult, but there wasn't. So alternative roosts were provided, and the tunnel sealed so the bats could get out, but not back in. They probably all left within a day. Problem solved, bats inconvenienced but unharmed, tunnel available for re-use. Like it!

From Network Rail: (http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/New-collaboration-signals-next-step-toward-extra-rail-destinations-for-Bicester-and-Oxford-1e6f.aspx)

The first lot of ballast has been dropped to create the curve.  Apparently 80000 tons of the stuff will be needed (and a fair amount of earth as well I should imagine) as it will be quite a big and long structure to link upwards five or so metres to the main Chiltern line:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-24107419 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-24107419)

First 'confirmation'(assuming this was ok'd by Chiltern) of the line closure month too.

So it's nearly finished then?

Does no-one at the BBC know basic English anymore?

Paul

The inquiry 'statement of case' reported that the distance along the Chiltern main line from the new Bicester South Jn to the intersection bridge where the existing lines cross is 750m, and the height difference is 8m - which gives an idea of the scale of the job.  I expect once the curve round to meet the existing line at the new Gavray Jn is included the overall length of the chord lines will be getting towards 1000m or so?

Paul

A lot further than that, if you include the distance needed once it reaches the level Mainline. There is, I understand, a 6car length before the flat junction in which joining trains can wait for mainline access, should there be late running on the Mainline.

Understandably, the idea is that hill starts aren't sensible

There may well be a flat section near the junction, however the overall length is actually shown as 1000m as I anticipated, (now that I've blown it up and can read the 100m marks all the way along the drawing...)

Shown on sheets 1,2 and 3 of CRCL/P/6/B2 - one of the inquiry documents on the TWA site, but please be aware it's pretty massive file (105 Mb) for those on slow connections:

http://www.chiltern-evergreen3.co.uk/uploads/04Oct2010/CRCL-P-6-B2%20-%20Appendix%202%20-%20Stephen%20Barker.pdf

Paul

Pauk - I read the BBC report that all had been delivered by rail as all of the first lot and not that all the ballast needed for the job has been delivered.

Well yes, that's what I thought they probably meant as well, but they still needn't report it in such an obviously ambiguous way.

Paul

Provisional replacement bus timings have been released for consultation for the closure early next year between Oxford and Bicester Town.  Although not a public consulation, OBRAG (Oxford to Bicester Rail Action Group) are being consulted, so regular passengers can have their say via them (but you'll have to be quick!).

Details and a downloadable timetable are available at:  http://www.obrag.org.uk/ (http://www.obrag.org.uk/)

From an initial look it seems to be quite a reasonable replacement service, though rather confusingly their appears to be two different options, one of which has a (very) optimistic 30-minute journey time from Oxford to Bicester non-stop which might just be possible off-peak, but no chance in the peaks!  The other is more realistic with a 45-minute timing in the peaks, but that has a noticeable gap Oxford to Bicester in the evening peak when there should be a fast bus, but there's only a 17:45 via Islip, timed at an unrealistic 45-minutes with that stop.  If both timetables will be running then the gaps are plugged, but the contradiction in timings is confusing!

They should make one lane of the A34 from the M40 junction to Oxford a bus lane.

 ;D ;D ;D

Water Eaton Parkway is to be known as Oxford Parkway, Chiltern have decided:

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-names-new-oxfordshire-station-oxford-parkway (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-names-new-oxfordshire-station-oxford-parkway)

Rather pleasing given they've almost adopted my suggestion from back in mid-2010.   ;)


Though not everyone agreed at the time as can be seen in the following discussion at the bottom of this page of the thread:  http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=3323.90 (http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=3323.90)

Work continues on the new chord and junction at Bicester.  Still lots do do, but you can now see the route the new train will take.

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5479/10494074276_0451c1606f_c.jpg)

(http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5526/10494265243_5efdcb05d4_b.jpg)

Also, demolition of the old (and grafitti ridden) grain silo on the location of the new Oxford Parkway station has commenced.  An eyesore, but a bit of a local icon!

Is that a canal on the right or does the track drainage need some attention.

Thank you for the photographs, it's good to see that progress is being made at last.

I notice that some changes to the arrangement of the connection at the other end of the Bicester to Oxford line have been announced. Essentially the idea of re-using the LNWR route to Oxford has been dropped in favour of keeping the connection off the GW line near Wolvercote and making the easternmost line on the GW formation (the 'Jericho' line) reversible for the Chiltern trains.

I have seen no mention of it, but this change will make it easier and quicker to divert GW trains via Oxford when engineering work closes the line between Didcot and Paddington. As it will no longer be necessary to divert trains as far as Banbury and then reverse them, there should be a considerable time saving.

I suspect the HSTs won't run that route.  Pax will just be directed onto the Chiltern trains. Some will, of course, already be choosing to route that way once services arecrunning

And when the main GW route is IEP'd they will run out of juice as there are currently no plans to extend the sparks effect on the Chiltern Line

Sort of being mentioned for CP (Control Period) 6

I think perhaps the point made was more to do with the use as a diversionary route such as those needed when Reading was blocked last Easter, or at Christmas 2010.

But as it turns out, despite this diversionary potential being referred to in Chiltern's original PR as likely to be useful in the event of GW rebuild disruption:


...I suspect most of the GW upheaval, at least between Paddington and Reading, is now due for completion before EG3...

Paul

Why do you think that? During, for example, the Reading blockade some trains from South Wales and Bristol were diverted via Banbury so that the passengers did not have to be bustituted and could be carried through to Paddington in the same vehicle albeit at the price of extended journey times.

Forcing the passengers to change trains is not 'user friendly' and goes against the stated policy of both Network Rail and the TOCs to try to reduce the maximum inconvenience caused - because of the need to change vehicles it is only slightly better than 'bustitution'.

The other reasons I see against transhipping passengers are that the layout at Oxford is not conducive for train to train transfers in the eastbound direction at least; as far as I know the bay platforms to be used by the Chiltern trains will, in the first instance at least, be limited to 4 or 5 coach long trains so getting an HST trainload of passengers into will be cosy at best and the trains will terminate at Marylebone rather than Paddington. At least the reversal at Banbury meant that the trains started from and reached the terminus expected by the passengers.

However, because the Water Eaton to Bicester section will not be open until 2015 it is unlikely to be used as a diversion in the short term. However it will be available after then and could be helpful for the latter stages of the GW electrification and certainly afterwards if serious maintenance or repair is needed on any of the assets between Didcot and London. Bridges will still need to be replaced and track replaced even after electrification.

If that's aimed at me, I was trying to agree that it could be used as a diversion in the event of a Reading style blockade, with the caveat that it's basically too late.  Discussions I've had with project staff at Reading suggest that it is likely that there'll only be one or two more similar closures, and they will be comparatively short, i.e. single long weekends.

Bridge replacement is comparatively rare, most of the recent and immediate future work on overbridges is for electrification, and is going to be finished by 2015.  Track replacement has been undertaken routinely for many years without full closure of all four lines, so it wouldn't need to start now just because they can divert via the Chilterns.

Paul

Is the new embankment being built to W10 standards?

There'll be a short window twixt the whole route to Oxford being open and EastWest opening - 3 years maybe? Yes, assuming the route can take HSTs, if there is a blockade (nothing planned in long-term plan yet) - But 2 Chilterns, at least 2 EastWest and a freight path mean putting anything else up there will be tight....

Not directly! The comment was made as a response to the post by ChrisB but somehow I got it out of sequence. Nevertheless, I think we are in grave danger of agreeing! The point I was trying to make was that improving the capacity and number of alternative routes for the GW has to be a 'good thing' in that it improves the networks resilience to disruption. A similar project currently underway is the re-doubling of the Swindon to Kemble stretch. Because of the arrangement of the GW network the number of useable alternative routes decrease the closer one is to London, trains from the South West can use Waterloo (at a pinch) but other routes are less well served. If possible avoiding tipping the passengers out of their train, whether into a bus or another train, has to be welcomed and avoidance of unnecessary miles and reversals (which cost time) also improves the 'customer experience'.

I realise that there most maintenance work can be done without closing the route between Didcot and London but one should be looking further ahead than the next ten or fifteen years. Who is to say that a grade separated junction for the Windsor line at Slough for an additional Crossrail service may not occur or that a stone train won't tip several hundred tonnes of ballast over the line at Airport Junction?

The more alternative routes there are, the better!

Very true, but in the case of a potential Chiltern line diversion it would mean crew signing that route (unlikely to be financially viable for such a distance), or pilot drivers being hired in - OK for big blockades, but unlikely to be possible to introduce for just unplanned service disruption.  I guess there's a small chance of the Crossrail service introduction works leading to diversions via that route towards the end of the decade, but GWML electrification is going to be done and dusted by the time it could be used.  I think there's a further (via Banbury) diversion due in Easter 2015 when Reading's final big alterations come into use.

And the point that electrification may well reduce the number of alternative routes for many trains is a good one.

Unfortunately, GW electrification will vastly *reduce* the number of diversions usable by their electric trains. Can't see a fleet of locos being kept simply to tow these over non-electrified lines, can you?

Indeed not.  That was my point.  Though at least having a reasonably large bi-mode fleet (and some HST's in the shorter term) will keep some diversionary routes available still, at least in theory.

Getting out of sequence is awkward. We have an exchange that reads (first lines only):

ChrisB:
4064ReadingAbbey
On misunderstandings such as these are wars started (and the "Mastermind" sketch by the Two Ronnies (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y0C59pI_ypQ) based)

Regards the question is the line being built to W10, my guess is it will be, NR Head of Track normally requires all new and where possible rebuilt existing infrastructure to be W12 / W10 even if it is just a island in amongst smaller gauges unless there is never going to be a chance in the future to increase those gauges.

The Chiltern evidence to the TWA inspector goes into some detail on this.  All the work on the Oxford to Bicester section (common to East West Rail) is designed to allow for W12 and electrification, this was especially relevant to the DfT funded work at Wolvercot tunnel.   

Regarding the new Bicester Chord, isn't the only structure over the railway a footbridge to take the existing footpath, but why would this need to be W12 cleared anyway?  Nonetheless the difference between passenger and W12 would be minimal.

Paul

Sorry for the out of sequence post. I was replying to one post earlier - I hadn't realised that another post had arrived in the time before I pressed 'Send'.

We've all been there!

I think this is the correct place to post this....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-24743727

The old grain silo being demolished at Water Eaton

How long before someone finds bats and/or newts living there?  :)

It's practically gone already....

Yes, I popped over to take a picture the day before yesterday and there was practically nothing left to photograph!

Perhaps the newts have eaten it all ...  :P :o ;D

Best BBC voice: "It is now 9.30, and that is the end of the newts"

Realtimetrains is now showing full bus replacement of the Oxford to Bicester Town service from 15th Feb 14 (a Saturday) onwards, so as expected but not yet formally announced:

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/search/advanced/BIT/2014/02/15/0600-2000?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt

Paul

Posters up at Oxford station announcing bus replacement while line is completely rebuilt. Lasting until summer 2015 ?

Why is this project taking so long? (esp as the line has been closed)
The main work is the chord, but they surely could still get the Bicester to Oxford service back up and running sooner!

In the spirit of the season, "Oh no it hasn't". 

See above, it closes 14th Feb.  You must have already forgotten the long drawn out TWA Order inquiry, and the resulting objections and appeals process?

Paul

There is some substantial Civil Engineering to be done to get the line speed to 100 mph, the route has only had very basic maintenance done on it over the years; if its done the right type of work is done now the route will be good for many many years.

An article concerning the rebuilt station plans at Bicester Town, including a couple of artists impressions:

http://www.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/news/local/new-designs-for-bicester-town-station-unveiled-1-5832114 (http://www.buckinghamtoday.co.uk/news/local/new-designs-for-bicester-town-station-unveiled-1-5832114)

Now, what do we think of this design?

Personally - the canopies over the platforms appear to be missing? Or two stories up and nowhere near the platform edge? So no shelter on the platforms whatsoever?

And with no windows on the platform level of the new station building that I can see, no view of train departure/arrival from within the station?

Almost as bad a design as Warwick Parkway! Also no platform canopies there either.

The thing is, Chiltern have to fund the improvements themselves!

And the reason why Warwick P is so spartan is that furious local residents prevented Chiltern from putting up canopies or more substantial buildings

(despite the fact that their house price probably shot up as they are now in the London commuter belt!)

Heard something about parts of  the new embankment at Biecester has had to bulldozed away as it was acting as dam for for water.

Until I can get to see the area in daylight, I can't check....wouldn't surprise me!

There is a weekend block on 8/9 March to install the additional points on the Mainline. Plus weeks on weekday early closures afterwards for ancillary works. Ugh.

It's part of their franchise payment, so effectively taxpayer money - Chiltern being forced to spend money that would otherwise come to us the taxpayers on railway investment. So its our money....


True, to an extent. No such problem at Bicester Town though.

Chiltern Railways held a presentation at Islip yesterday. Apparently it was not well advertised locally. A friend who lives in the area was able to attend and reported back:

^Evergreen 3^  Oxford-Bicester Railway Improvement Project. Presentation in the Terrace Room of Islip Village Hall, 4th March 2014
 
The event, which remained open from 5.30 to 7.30 took the form of large detailed plans laid out on tables, various posters, and a few refreshments. There were probably about ten people from  Chiltern Railways and from the contractors  with whom it was possible to discuss aspects of the work, including the replacement buses. . Several people I know in Islip drifted in and one lady from Murcott . I was able to discuss (in indeed help identify) what I knew already and the areas to which the maps related with some of my acquaintances.  I was guided by one Chiltern Railways person to the Carillion contract manager with my queries.
 
I ascertained that the track is to be double throughout and the Carillion person looked blank when I mentioned the rumours that there were to be single track sections. He only said that of course one track is laid at a time, so in a sense there would be a time when only one track is in place.
 
The detailed plan of ^my^ bit of the railway (Mansmoor Road, near Charlton-on-Otmoor, https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.8487452,-1.1879143,15z) shows what will happen in my ^new dog walking field^.  The farm access bridge and a concrete track will be built. However in addition to this there will be a larger section of wide road and a one hectare compound for the works (for dismantling old track etc.) and another holding area. This explains why such a large area of field has been obtained. It is not just for the farm track.  Material to construct the ramps up to bridges is apparently to come from various sources.  I knew already that a lot of material for the chord of Bicester had come by rail from deposits of old railway ballast in the North of England  For the new ramps some use will be made of surplus ballast that is already on the line and there is a lot around Wolvercote. A lot will be gathered up and will of course be replaced by new ballast. In addition there may be some material from local ^borrow pits^ . It sounds as though not too much material will have to be brought in by road.

Not sure where those rumours came from, unless they're a remnant of the original design which was in two phases, the first of which (to get the Chiltern service up and running) had single track for part of the route.  Phase two (for EWR etc.) always involved double track, and would need to given the aspired frequency of trains planned.  The delay in Chiltern's original construction timetable, thanks to all the objections, meant that they're progressing straight to phase 2 - which of course is beneficial in the sense that a further lengthy closure is not required in a couple of years time.

The only single track section will be the chord linking the line to the Chiltern main lines at Bicester, and I'm not quite sure of the exact layout (is anyone!) between Wolvercote Tunnel and Oxford.

The chord itself is however shown as a double track route in the TWA order drawings.  Gavray Junction was to be incomplete on opening, while the line towards Claydon remained single, but space would allow it to be altered to a double junction later.

I think part of the single/double debate about the overall route is that the most detailed drawings in the public domain, (i.e. those on the TWA inquiry site), must all have been overtaken by the decision to go straight to phase 2.

Paul

Has the layout for the Oxford end of the line actually been decided yet? The last update I saw suggested that the plans had not been finalised yet. Presumably there is still a bit of time to decide with the Oxford Parkway-Oxford section not due to reopen until 2016.

Correct - the twin track has been in plans since the TWA was finally issued.


That's not right - the chord is double too, up the incline to the flat (Gavray) junction on the mainline. The points for which are going in this weekend, hence the line closure from 2300 tonight thru to Monday morning.


This will be complete at mainline level. The junction will be double track to double track chord too, with single line left towards Claydon (not sure which line will be classed as 'up' and 'down' though....discuss)


It's a double junction now, with a further up to down link towards Claydon's single line. EWR will pick this up & dual it....


There is...until Autumn 2015. I have seen the latest layout, but with this amount of time before the Oxford resignalling project (which is now in two parts I believe) in early 2016 (currently), there is time for this to change.

Railfuture Thames Valley has invited Mike Hogg, Projects Manager at FGW, to brief us at our AGM on May 7th in Oxford. All the latest plans will be discussed....

I think more accurately that's to be Bicester South Junction.   It's the other end of the chord which is Gavray Jn.

Paul

Ah, ok.

Well Gavray will be twin track staggered junction so that up & down trains can use the junction at the same time.

From the Railway Gazette: (http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/contract-awarded-for-chiltern-to-oxford.html)

Network Rail version of same news here:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Contract-awarded-for-design-and-build-of-new-route-between-London-and-Oxford-2019.aspx

If this lot are about to start, then who is the contractor for the stuff that's already underway?

Paul

prob went ahead on heads of terms?

Several bulldozers were working on the enormous ballast pile at Watereaton yesterday and plenty of cars and trucks in the newly constructed depot site.

Yes, my mistake.  The chord is double track, too.

A bit of double-announcing, maybe?

Transport Secretary has visited the Oxford Parkway station site before viewing construction works on the chord - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/transport-secretary-inspects-regional-rail-and-road-links

Notice they are still talking about electrification all the way to Bedford

There is no point in not doing the Blechley - Bedford section, one of the principle justifications for electrifying Eastwest Rail is the freight spine which will include the East Mids route electrification North of Bedford and there is the eventual aspiration to join Eastwest Rail to the ECML

Thought there was talk of only going as far as Bletchley

There was a definite 'staging' of the work confusingly described in the most recent CP5 enhancements plan (draft) back in December, but wiring Bletchley to Bedford was definitely in there somewhere:


The difference is possibly that east of Bletchley all the work is to be done on a live railway that isn't having any other major upgrade work - so if there is stuff like bridge clearance work to be done it will take a bit longer as it will have to be fitted round operating services.

But there's also the point that if the main purpose of the electric spine is to allow traffic to flow Oxford to Bletchley to Bedford then northwards from Bedford - then that requires electrification of the MML, which will not be ready when EWR wiring gets as far as Bletchley, but of course the WCML is already wired north of Bletchley.   What I'm suggesting is that wiring Bletchley to Bedford could be a dead end for a couple of years if done at the same time.

Paul

I took a trip over to Bicester yesterday to get some snaps of progress with the track upgrade and new chord up to the Chiltern main line.  I thought some of you might like to see them.

Here is the view at London Road Crossing looking west to where the old Bicester Town station was located (pending its replacement being built):

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5607/15624353392_b9315bacbc_z.jpg)


And east towards Bletchley:

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5616/15620833951_cb072acec7_z.jpg)


Here is the rather intrusive new footbridge which has replaced Tubbs Lane crossing:

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3940/15599803256_f5d4d1cbd6_z.jpg)


Here are two views from that footbridge, a good new location for photographs, of the new Gavray Junction and the start of the chord that leads up to the new Bicester South Junction (the Chiltern line can be seen in the distance where it crosses over the Bicester to Bletchley line:

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3943/15620816041_b9e876e7e4_z.jpg)

(https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3945/15437347708_ac779a1989_z.jpg)

For those interested in the project, there's also a selection of timelapse videos that have been uploaded in the last couple of weeks and can be viewed at:

http://vimeo.com/album/3076666 (http://vimeo.com/album/3076666)

Many thanks for your excellent updates on this project, IndustryInsider.  ;) :D ;D

Aye-aye, I-I: splendid work! Thank you.

Here's some pictures of the work at Oxford Parkway taken in the lovely winter sunshine today:

Here's the entrance to the current Park and Ride, and, with some road layout alterations, the entrance to the new station as well:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8650/15804356290_c3bb52f942_c.jpg)


Here's a view of what will be the new station building in the early phases of construction:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7507/15989634241_54724812b8_c.jpg)


Here's a view looking down to where the new platforms will be located with some foundations being sunk, presumably for the new footbridge?
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7545/15991632995_991f42a57a_c.jpg)


A view of the temporary stone terminal and work to build the replacement terminal in the distance.  The new double track formation of the route can also be clearly seen along with flattened land which will presumably be where the new London bound platform will be built:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7484/15990955242_7a5f3cd7a0_c.jpg)


Looking the other way towards Oxford and until the old stone terminal closes, there's little that can be done, but some track has been laid in the distance and sleepers lie ready in the cess:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8663/15369399734_223d84dd0d_c.jpg)

Saw track installed on the chord this morning....

Yes, the chord is nearing completion.  Here's a couple of photos taken today.  Not the best quality as they were taken from a moving Chiltern train with filthy windows (tut, tut!)...



1)  Tracks sweeping down from the Chiltern main line towards Gavray Junction:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7554/15895486709_1cfb2f4061_c.jpg)

2)  Gavray Junction in the distance (you can just see the footbridge in the distance I took the photos at the top of this page), and the two tracks that go under the Chiltern line which will become the main line to Bletchley!
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7474/16079650501_4e19dfd243_c.jpg)

Thanks for the photos - very interesting as it is often dark when I race past!

It's a shame that the London bound line doesn't pass under the Chiltern route and connect on the other side. I suppose the curve would be too tight. But I fear a new bottleneck will be born...

Are they going to re-name Bicester Town as Bicester Village?

Depends whether the outlet is willing to pay the sponsorship fee..:-)

Pic in the Oxford Mail of the completed Oxford Parkway building. Looks like a large warehouse

See http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=13909.msg170069#msg170069  ;)

The latest in Portillo's travels included a segment on the Bicester line remodelling available to view on the link below (from 9 through to 15 minutes).  Nothing new in it, but some good aerial shots and a worthwhile watch:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0517v7x/great-british-railway-journeys-series-6-19-oxford-to-luton (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0517v7x/great-british-railway-journeys-series-6-19-oxford-to-luton)

Network Rail & FGW tell me that Oxford resignalling put back to Feb17, in time for electrification TT in May17.

Chiltern appear to be aware, talking to NR as to whether part 1 forctheir services can be done sooner, or they make do with a partial service from May16 for a year. They didn't appear very confident. Decision/scheduling needs to happen quite soon if its going to be phased

Here's a photo update of the progress on the rebuilding of the Oxford to Bicester line:

Oxford Parkway station building is being fitted out:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7697/17320747505_f7b24ff78e_z.jpg)

Oxford Parkway platforms are starting to take shape:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7770/17113310667_43646203c9_z.jpg)

Islip - view looking south from the bridge near the station.
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7723/17113309447_63c8ea0b54_z.jpg)

Here's how that view used to look:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8872/17134600959_6874648f2c_z.jpg)

Islip station - view looking north from that bridge showing the new station taking shape:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7741/17133190940_f5f7f0edb8_z.jpg)

Here's how that view used to look - tranquil rural location no more!:
(https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7744/16698372394_84dcd49301_z.jpg)

And finally, here's a closer view of the new station at Islip:
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8750/17133189770_99b9985be1_z.jpg)


Hopefully I'll take another trip out to Bicester within a month or so and report back on progress with the new station there.

That update coming on the day that Chiltern have announced the first stage of the reopening (from Oxford Parkway), a month or so later than planned on 26th October:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-32516375 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-32516375)

Nearly two months - was due on 6 September.

Somewhat surprised - we were led in confidence last week to believe it was going to be early October.

Here's Chiltern's press release

Poor old Islip doesn't even get a mention, despite the villagers gaining a useful new direct link to London, and hopefully at least as good commuting options to Oxford and Bicester as they enjoyed before the line closed for the upgrade.

Not quite - FGW (& Chiltern carried the se on until the line closed) increased the offer to 11 trains each way - 4 above the PSR). Now removed by Chiltern, but at one meeting they offered (accidentally we think) 8 trains each way, and they agreed to be held to that. So a reduction of 3 trains each way, sadly

Well I suppose 8 is better than 7, but more important than the number is the time of the trains.  Hopefully the 4.5 hour gap has been reduced and the commuting services tweaked from the consultation timetable which sold Islip very short!

Chiltern are still tweaking it & should publish in a couple of weeks

A couple more pictures showing progress at Bicester:

Here's Gavray Junction with track laying complete and just a bit of tidying up to do:

(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8774/17365375970_34f7cf166d_c.jpg)

Here's progress on the new Bicester Village station, formerley Bicester Town:

(https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5463/16930415434_5ccd0b251d_c.jpg)

Ouch! - squealing wheels at Gavray Junction - that's a tightish curve) - right next to those poor houses.

More photos and information here - http://www.bicestertooxfordcollaboration.com/index.html (http://www.bicestertooxfordcollaboration.com/index.html)

From the satellite view I reckon it will have to be about 250m - 300m radius - and that's fairly comparable to the curve immediately south of Fareham Station - and that generates fairly significant wheel noise on plain track.   

Here you also have the additional noise of the S&C layout, especially for up trains going over three sets of points...

Will be interesting to see how good the mitigation measures are - normally flange lubricators, although water spray systems have also been tried in the past.

Paul

All steam ahead for Chiltern after the new accommodation block at Oxford was finally approved in a West Area Planning Committee meeting last night:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-33880512 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-33880512)

This now means the new bay platform can be built and the current bay platform extended to allow for Chiltern's 30-minute frequency service to Marylebone to start (hopefully) next spring.

Last minute changes were made to try to ensure the notification of works was approved which involved reducing the 1st floor to increase the amount of sunlight to the residents of Stable Close.  That reduces the size of the building, but was probably a sensible step to make sure approval was given!

I did say 'hopefully'

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/13635720.Opening_of_new_rail_link_could_be_delayed_until_next_summer/ (http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/13635720.Opening_of_new_rail_link_could_be_delayed_until_next_summer/)

Looks like a couple of months delay is on the cards.

Not really a surprise. Gives NR longer for the Oxford works too

If anything, I was expecting a longer delay.  A couple of months isn't too bad - let's hope that's all it is.

Judging from the Oxford Mail article (and subsequent Googling) it looks as if the gentleman making most of the fuss lives in a flat some 15 or 20 metres from the railway line. The block looks to be purpose built in the 60s or 70s, or thereabouts, but is closer to the line than the houses with gardens in the immediate area. He is also objecting to the flyover proposed for the Oxford North junction.

Apparently the vibration of the passing trains has damaged the building structure over the years and he, and other inhabitants of the block are concerned that the increase in traffic due to East-West Rail will cause further damage.

Having due sympathy with the gentleman, one has to wonder why he lives so close to the railway if he doesn't like the noise and if vibrations from the railway have damaged the structure it says more about the quality of the build than the vibrations caused by the stone trains to which he refers. They can't have been moving at more than about 40-45mph at that spot anyway.

Maybe it would be quicker and cheaper for NR to rehouse the inhabitants further away from the line...?

30mph would have been the maximum at that location.  There are many thousands of properties that lie a lot closer to railway lines and busy roads that haven't been turned into rubble.  In fact I spent many years living that close to a railway line myself and it's true there were a few hairline cracks in the wall which may possibly have been caused by vibration from the trains, but equally might well have been due to the usual settlement cracks virtually every property gets.  The home isn't 'damaged' as such, and it certainly isn't about to fall down.

My guess is that a 30mph stone train rumbling past on old jointed track, worn out concrete sleepers and poorly maintained ballast would create much more vibration than a modern unit at 75mph on new rails, steel sleepers and fresh properly maintained ballast.

It's been said before, but the delays and extra costs that these lone objectors can cause to a relatively simple project like this is pretty depressing!

I agree. Whilst out cycling the other day, we stopped on the hump-back bridge near the site of Clifton Bridge station. It was only after stopping that we noticed a long and fully-laden coal train was passing a two metres below us. There was no perceptible vibration, and the noise was almost drowned out by the sound of traffic on the Cumberland Basin flyover system, 100m away.

Work continues to get the Oxford Parkway to Marylebone service ready to commence later in the month.  Here's some pictures from yesterday:

Finishes touches to Oxford Parkway station:
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5715/21835644248_eef3f9c333_b.jpg)

Driver training has commenced with these two views taken at the new overbridge just to the north of Oxford Parkway - a cracking location for pictures though it's on a bridleway leading to a farm, not a public road.  They feature one of the 168/3 units freshly converted from 170 units that were in use with TransPennine Express.  The first is a zoom shot over a distance of almost a mile of straight track with Mill Lane, Islip in the distance.  This used to be single track and 20/30mph!
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/691/22011207942_4d219c8b31_c.jpg)

The second shows the relocated Banbury Road Stone Terminal, with Oxford Parkway visible in the distance:
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5744/21836580729_49881de74b_c.jpg)

With work as far as Oxford Parkway virtually complete, the heavy machinery has now moved on to the stretch through to the main station at Oxford.  Viewed here is progress from just south of Oxford Parkway, where the current end of the line is:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/1/721/21835644848_c2636f4eb1_c.jpg)

And here is a view north from the end of Wolvercote tunnel:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5679/22033375781_64f2fef9c1_c.jpg)

Geoff Plumb has put a load of pictures up today on his site here:

https://plumbloco.smugmug.com/Trains/October-2015/i-7gbJx3P

Some nice coincidences caught on camera, such as the NR test train waiting on the chord just as two service trains cross on the mainline;   and some busy looking movements involving Chiltern units in the COD Bicester reception lines...

Hope this is of interest

Paul

Indeed it is.  The reception lines for the COD at Bicester have been very busy over the last few days as the driver training programme continues.  http://railcam.uk/site/ has added the new layout to its 'Chiltern's' map and I've been watching the moves with interest.  Also interesting to see the revised layout for the COD. 

Unless they've added a new footbridge, Geoff Plumb had to take a rather hazardous walk along the verges of the A41 to get those pictures.  I did it myself a while back and will visit again in the near future so I can show everyone some before/after photos at that and many other locations along the route.

It looks like the hitherto COD exchange sidings may now be redundant. Presumably the train in the picture has started its journey from the main yard at Graven Hill?

We commend your dedication!  ;D

FGWR are running an email survey to find out people's reactions to Oxford Parkway opening. A friend forwarded one to me - it starts with a bunch of "behaviour" questions (where do you live, how often do you travel to London, what for) then presents you with this rather curious matrix:

(http://www.systemed.net/temp/gwr_survey.jpg)

It appears to randomly mix up the composition of the grid, so Scenario 1 is a Chiltern 'Silver Train' exterior, a Turbo interior, the GWR name and FGW punctuality. I can see what they're trying to achieve but my reaction, to be honest, was a bit "well... I can't really answer that because it's not going to happen".

Presumably some marketing company has been paid a small fortune to come up with this nonsense.

It all goes to re-enforce a thought I've been having for long time.

"We've all stopped thinking!"

There's not just one but about 20 of these pages in the survey - actually it seemed like 200 - and I had the same thought about the relative likelihood of each one happening.  I'm afraid I rather lost the will to live by the end....

Anyway I'm booked on one of the first trains on October 26th - not actually the first passenger train as that leaves Oxford Parkway at something like 05:40, and that seemed rather like hard work.

Oh, are the 20 pages intentional? I saw that the progress bar wasn't advancing, assumed that it had got stuck in some sort of loop, and gave up...

Interesting to see, though, that despite GWR's trumpeting of advance fares on the Cotswold Line, the options presented here are solely walk-up fares.

I' m informed by GWR that the questionnaire is as designed...make of that what you will, but its no mistake.

The first trains on the Oxford Chiltern route run on Sunday 25th, not the 26th

How easy is it to get from Oxford station to Oxford Parkway?

Are bus passes available on Park and Ride buses?

Park & Ride to Water Eaton....need to walk into town (Debenhams) to catch it, I believe.

Alternatively, there is still a Rail Replacement Bus from Oxford to Oxford Parkway that can be used with the purchase of a rail ticket valid on or after 25 October - according to Chiltern twitter feed

The Park & Ride 500 service is being extended to run between the two stations, with an big improvement in hours of operation to meet all the new trains including the introduction of a Sunday service - all because of the opening of Oxford Parkway.  Well done to the Oxford Bus Company.

http://www.oxfordbus.co.uk/500/ (http://www.oxfordbus.co.uk/500/)

There are also a plethora of other bus services that stop there linking the city centre.

Are you sure? Most are stopping out on the main road with Chiltern due to build a walkway direct from the station at Parkway - at the moment you have to walk out via the P&R. The only other bus I know that goes into the P&R/station is the 700 that goes direct to Oxford Hospitals & not via the City Centre.

Pretty sure.  As well as the 700s, the existing 500 stops there, as do occasional S5's.  Continuing to stop on the main road will be the various incarnations of the 2 route to/from Kidlington, the S4, the majority of the S5's and a couple of others.  I didn't know a walkway was being built - that will come in very handy for those routes. 

The link I posted says 'Oxford Parkway' in the timetable and says 'From 25th October, our park&ride500 will be extended to run from Oxford Parkway Station to Oxford Rail Station. The operating hours will also be extended to cover Sundays, and will run early and late enough to meet all Chiltern Railways services at the new station.

Oh ok, didn't know about the S5s - there's nothing in the timetable for that service that indicates that.

They're marked on this timetable:

https://www.stagecoachbus.com/pdfs/XOANS05.pdf (https://www.stagecoachbus.com/pdfs/XOANS05.pdf)

Like I said, only occasional stops though - three or four per day in each direction in the peaks to/from Bicester & Glory Farm.  Others all stop on the road outside.  Also, the W10 bus to/from Woodstock stops at the P&R - again there's only a handful a day though.

It'll be interesting to see how the bus routes develop after Oxford Parkway station opens, and when the through route to the main Oxford station is finished.  For example, would the W10 increase in frequency due to new demand, and will the S5 struggle thanks to a fast and frequent train service?

Yes, I certainly think the S5 might suffer, if Chiltern keep their BIT-OXF fares pegged.

Well, the 'preview' service started today, with one local news story ahead of what will no doubt be a day of much more coverage when the official service starts tomorrow morning.  Looks like they got a Silver Train out for the first train today:

http://www.witneygazette.co.uk/news/13894736.Keen_passengers_board_the_first_trains_to_leave_Oxford_Parkway/ (http://www.witneygazette.co.uk/news/13894736.Keen_passengers_board_the_first_trains_to_leave_Oxford_Parkway/)

Services have been running pretty much perfectly so far, with the longest delay being a 4 minute late arrival at Marylebone on the 10:48 from Oxford Parkway.

The first train was a 6car (2x3car) 168.

That silver train pictured left at 1135-ish I think. I didn't see that reporter until well after 10.30 either.

Test day yesterday, launch this morning and a celebratory Drinks & Supper tonight in a huge marquee in the car park. I hope they've got the heaters in!

Thanks for that.  Quite a mild night forecast for tonight fortunately.  I'm hoping to get out and about to have a good look one day later this week.

Parkway is just about complete - Islip & B/Village less so with a couple more weeks of 24/7 work to go.

I visited Hanborough station this morning wondering if the CL travellers were deserting the CL. No sign at present. As it is school half term I had expected numbers to be down but it seems that for the 08.01 stopper numbers have significantly increased on a few months ago although some of the extras are just going to Oxford probably due to the A40 road works in North Oxford. Chatting to regulars it seems that most are aware that getting from Hanborough and Witney areas to Oxford Parkway at commuting times would take too long due to the ever increasing traffic congestion on the roads.

A very successful first day with, so far, no delays of more than a few minutes to any of the trains with some arriving at their destinations early.  I believe the advertised connection from Islip into the 07:24 from Oxford Parkway to Marylebone was not made (it arrived at 07:23 according to RTT, and the 07:24 wasn't held a minute or so for it), so that was one minor cock-up, but otherwise pretty impressive:

New reports/press releases include:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/news/2015/oct/Oxford-to-London-line-opens/ (http://www.networkrail.co.uk/news/2015/oct/Oxford-to-London-line-opens/)
http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2015-10-26/new-rail-line-links-oxford-with-london/ (http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/story/2015-10-26/new-rail-line-links-oxford-with-london/)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/11953953/Chiltern-Railways-launches-rival-London-to-Oxford-service.html (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/11953953/Chiltern-Railways-launches-rival-London-to-Oxford-service.html)

And david Cameron opened it at 1300, catching the 1317 to London afterwards.

Thanks to Chiltern for drinks & Dinner tonight. Very enjoyable.

I wish Chiltern would stop with the "first new rail line from a city to London in 100 years" spin.
We're talking about 100 yds of railway, not 100 miles! ::)

From the TV reports, it looks as if hundreds of frustrated commuters have already switched to Chiltern - and after today, do not intend to return. ;D

I intend to trial the service soon, and will definitely use the railway for my frequent trips to Water Eaton car park.

If you happen to live in the immediate locality then the service may well be more convenient for London commuters than driving into Oxford, so maybe some of the commuters weren't frustrated, but have just made a sensible choice.   

Though I am very sceptical as to how many will use it instead of, say, Hanborough or stations further along the Cotswold Line, given the notorious Oxford rush hour traffic.

The other point to consider is where your ultimate destination is in London.  Although Paddington and Marylebone are not far apart it can still take a while in the peak. 

How on earth did you deduce that from the TV reports. Were pax interviewed and said so? Not that I saw. So you inject your hope into fact?....stop exaggerating, or we'll all start laughing at you.


tongue-in-check, one assumes?!

Better hurry with the trial - I can't see it lasting long with so few passengers.

I spent a very enjoyable day having a good old gander at the newly opened link.

Started off by getting the 500 P&R link from Oxford station to Oxford Parkway at around 9am this morning.  Ran to time and I was pretty much the only one on it.

Oxford Parkway still had plenty of orange jackets milling about, but the main area of the station seemed pretty much complete.  The station isn't going to win any awards, but is perfectly functional and built to a reasonably high standard.  Staff were on hand to answer questions, though one of the urinals in the gents was blocked off much to the annoyance of one bloke.  Station announcements were a little difficult to hear due to the noise - not of the trains, but of the adjacent A34!

I caught the train to Haddenham & Thame Parkway, first stop Bicester Town Village.  My GPS app confirmed the Class 172 reached the linespeed of 100mph comfortably before braking for Bicester Village.  We did the distance of just over 8 miles in 7m 25s at an average speed of 66mph.  A brief stop and it was on to Haddenham & Thame Parkway with squealing wheels as we took the newly constructed chord before joining the familiar Chiltern Line route at Bicester South Junction.

Returning back from Haddenham, I alighted at Bicester Village to be greeted by very similar scenes to Parkway with the orange army everywhere!  Most of the station looked complete and the new station building looked nice and modern with its dark blue bricks glinting in the autumn sunshine.  There's a total of three exits, one to the town, one to the shopping centre and a third leading from the up platform.  All were open, but with finishing touches being applied wherever you looked.

I left the station and walked up past the London Road level crossing where queues quickly formed whenever the barriers lowered.  They cleared again quickly after, but I'd like to see how the traffic flows during the rush hour.  I walked through to where the new chord is located and the two new footbridges near Gavray Junction, especially the second one located on the chord itself, provide fantastic views of the new line and are a photographers dream.

Returning to the station I headed off to Islip station.  The train covered the 6 miles to Islip in 6m 20s at an average speed of 56mph.  That could've been a little quicker as the driver approached Islip quite cautiously - either fearing leaf contamination, still fine tuning his braking point, or a bit of both!  Still 4 minutes quicker than it used to be when the linespeed was 40mph!

Islip is really where it hits home just how much civil engineering has taken place.  A leafy 2-car single platform replaced with two 8-car length platforms linked by a footbridge.  Much fine tuning still to be done with fencing and lighting still to be completed in some areas.  A walk through the village meant I crossed the line three times with the area around Mill Lane virtually unrecognisable from what used to be there.

Finally, it was back to Oxford Parkway and another trip on the 500 bus which was waiting.  About 20 other people shared the bus back with me which was on time.  In fact everything I used all day was on time to the minute, and had ample seating available - except my local bus home which was full and standing and 20 minutes late!

So, overall, I was very impressed.  It was hard to remember how some of the old locations used to look given the complete transformation of the route, and it was almost surreal to sit on Islip station watching trains roar past at 100mph.  I saw several other people with GPS systems and camcorders, no doubt out on a similar fact finding mission.  The ride quality was very impressive as you'd expect from brand new infrastructure and it was interesting to see trains running in the 'wrong' direction on the bi-di signalled route on several occasions working various ECS moves whilst they complete the driver training program.  Currently, anything heading out of the relocated Banbury Road stone sidings has to travel on the wrong road as far as Bicester Village as well.

I have no doubt this will quickly become a very useful transport link, especially when the line to Oxford proper opens (hopefully) next year.

Many thanks for your articulate, detailed and fact-filled travelogue, IndustryInsider.  ;) :D ;D

Did you see 100's of commuters who had switched from GWR?

Not just any commuters, but frustrated commuters  ;D

And, not just during the winter, they are also apparently 'fleeced commuters'.  ;) ::) ;D

A few delays leading to short turnbacks at Bicester Village currently.  I can see those frustrated commuters rushing back to GWR at this rate...  :P

Owing to a broken down train at West Ruislip.

I understand the need to recover the timetable on occasions like this, but Chiltern's horrible habit of turning round short the actual trains that suffer the initial (usually longest!) delays is a real no-no for me. How do they think pax on these trains feel to suffer the initial delay & them find themselves turfed off short of their destination to await the following train - usually at least another 30 minute delay (as is this case?).

No, the need us to get those initially delayed pax to their destinations as quickly as possible & turn around following trains (or even canx one altogether) subsequently. May delay more pax but with valid undersrable reasons, you might retain your customers. To chuck geavily delayed pax of short is simply insulting

Here's a tweet & pic....


(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CSekaxKWcAAv0EZ.jpg)

The 0940 MYB-Birmingham....

Just to echo II's findings on the 'new' Bicester line and curve. I was surprised he didn't mention the full sized wall display ticket machines at Oxford Parkway.I thought they were advertising posters at first,as they are the same size and brightness as the standard illuminated  poster display panels. I did wonder about security as it seems that all your journey info appears on the screen and can be read at a distance.
My journey took me on to High Wycombe, and a short walk from the rail to the bus station,where I can recommend the Food Fountain with fantastic food and friendly faces. Sorry about the alliteration but I was doing a Leonard Sachs type chairman at an Old Tyme Music hall last night! As my friend and I have concessionary bus passes, we then took the Arriva max 300 to Aylesbury (where my friend espied the Chiltern 121 bubble car) and then another Arriva 280 sapphire double decker back to Oxford rail station via Thame. A lovely day out with the Oxford dark blue brick of Parkway station contrasting very nicely with the Autumn colours of the Chilterns still very much in evidence.
.

Is that a problem, really? No card/payment info appears, just journey details. Do you really think that others will read over your shoulder? And does that really matter to most/any?

Interesting question, ChrisB ... I found myself wondering about privacy / security the other day when the on train ticket inspector on the HST read out my journey details aloud (though I'm quite happy to tell you here I was travelling from Didcot to Melksham) ... and I was then concerned on Friday when a lady who claimed to be from Wiltshire Council came to check on our electoral role entry and had an plainly readable list of the addresses she was visiting,  with tics or "n/r" (no reply?) against those she had already been to.    Problem is, I guess, where you draw the line.

While you're simply a bod on a train (i.e. no personal info visible to others to ID you) - I personally see no problem with non-personal items like a journey being disclosed - unless other info likely to 'interest' others is also being disclosed, I see no problem.....

However, addresses are personal, especially when visible to neighbours who may well know exactly who lives in which house. So no problem with your first example, but I think I might have said something to your lady in the second!

I don't particularly want to be latched onto by the inebriated person in the next seat who wants a lift home from the station when he discovers that I, too, an travelling to Melksham,


Oh - I've only touched the tip of the iceberg with that story ... matter raised with the local council, who tell us not to trust people on our doorstep who turn up without ID, then (supposedly if she was genuine) send someone around without proper ID ... asking people to sign pieces of paper.   Probably legit, but they really should pracise what they preach.

Guards/TMs are just as likely to advise you of connections/times though, so pretty easy for someone?....even if they don't read aloud your ticket. Difficult one that, because a lot of pax appreciate this info.

It would matter to me when I travel with my bike: if someone sees me load the bike onto the train at Charlbury, and knows I'm travelling to (say) Hereford, they've got a chance of offloading it at an intermediate station. I do try to keep an eye on it where I can, but that's not always possible on an HST, especially if the thief is smart enough to find a way out at the far end of the platform.

In the past I've seen people chain and padlock the bike to the luggage rack to overcome that  :P

Possibly over sensitive, but I live on my own.  Had to take an assistant at the chemists to task when she asked my address while collecting a prescription and I only gave her the name of the road and not the number.  Now with my name and the road I think she had enough to know it was genuine.  After explaining it to her, she saw my point and now she remembers when I come in!

I didn't notice them to be honest - didn't need a ticket.  ;)

One other thing I forgot to mention was the multi-lingual announcements for when the train arrives at Bicester Village - two Asian languages, Mandarin one of them presumably?  Nice touch, though I'm sure that will only get those locals that want to keep Bicester's identity even more riled up!

Mandarin & Japanese

I was born in March, in the Year of the Monkey (h^uzi IIRC) and leave you to decide the context. Like Dave, I live at No 10. Also like Dave, I went to Eton.

But you've bought me a pint. Dave never has.

And look forward to so doing again! Dave paid for my daughter's glass of wine once. Michael Foot was the last politician to buy me a pint (see posts passim)

I've been to Eton too. But I didn't like the pub I found so I walked back across the Town Bridge to Windsor.

No politician has ever bought me a pint. But Tom King did once give me a generous tip.

I was doing the drains.

Does this mean Oxford-Cambridge reinstatement, which has been talked about for seeming decades now, is going to slip ever further behind?

http://www.bedfordtoday.co.uk/news/business/business-news/rail-line-delays-harm-economy-1-7047678

yes....

The section of EWR east of Bedford is still uncommitted, and is yet to appear in a HLOS as a DfT sponsored requirement, so it is difficult to say it has actually been 'delayed'.

Paul

Yes I suppose even the project being "delayed" sounds a bit too optimistic.

Despite some appalling weather, I took a trip to see Oxford Parkway and take the train to London on Friday.

Arriving at Oxford I took the Park and Ride bus to Oxford Parkway.  Despite the usual slow traffic along the Banbury Road the bus was only two minutes late at its destination and so maintained the connection to the train advertised in the timetable.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/oxp1.jpg)

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/oxp2.jpg)

The station is light and airy

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/oxp3.jpg)

It has no ticket office but three machines inside and one outside to purchase tickets.  These are the three interior ones which drew some comment earlier in the thread

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/oxp4.jpg)

There is a small caf^ but a slight niggle, if you sit in the caf^ area you cannot see any departure screens.

The trains are all using the far platform at the moment, from where you can get a glimpse of the work being done to take the line back to the city centre.

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/oxp5.jpg)

I know it was a wet day, but the windows on my train to London were the filthiest I have had on a train in a long time.  I caught one of the fast ones which only calls at Islip and Bicester Village and then London. 

(http://www.mbob.co.uk/rforum/oxp6.jpg)

Annoyingly I cannot find some pictures I took at the old Bicester Town station in FGW days, but it has certainly been transformed.  I was a little amused by the running in boards which say "Bicester Village, change here for Bicester Town Centre".

The train was very busy from Bicester - with a lot of shoppers returning to London.  Good journey and made a change from the usual route via Reading.

_{(Minor edit by FT, N! to correct font.)}

Thanks, bobm.

With regard to the platform of trains, the vast majority use the far side platform, but the other platform can be used for departures to London if need be and the daily loco-hauled service uses it.  The signalling is more restrictive in the 'wrong' direction though with only one signalling section between Oxford Parkway and the Bicester COD reception sidings.  It's good that reversible working is available though as trains will still be able to run in the event of a failure. 

The other platform will of course come into much more frequent use when the section through to Oxford proper opens.  If anyone is interested here are some planning diagrams of the work currently going on in the Oxford North Junction area as part of those works - 75mph crossovers replacing the current 25mph one.  It also gives details of the current, interim and final layouts of Oxford station as they currently stand:

http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Library/Documents/Planning/East%20West%20Rail%20B90505B-DRG-PWY3003%20AD%2021-4-15.pdf (http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Library/Documents/Planning/East%20West%20Rail%20B90505B-DRG-PWY3003%20AD%2021-4-15.pdf)

http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Library/Documents/Planning/East%20West%20Rail%20B90505B-DRG-PWY3004.pdf (http://www.oxford.gov.uk/Library/Documents/Planning/East%20West%20Rail%20B90505B-DRG-PWY3004.pdf)

Thanks for posting those documents II.  Good to see some significant PSR increases which should help ease some of the congestion issues at Oxford.

After seeing the pic of the new ticket machines I can understand why comments have been made about their size.

Did you find that via the planning site 'application search', because I can't seem to locate the application it is part of.  Did you perhaps record the planning application number, please?

Paul

That one is 15/01978/CND. It's one of four (at least) that are actually to do with noise - 15/03110/CND, 15/02501/CND, and 15/02673/CND are the others. The original "application" was the TWA, referred to as TWA/10/APP/01, but that doesn't work as a search name. There is a page full of interesting-looking links (http://oxford.live.jadu.net/downloads/20211/east_west_rail_phase_1) - all broken. Oxford City Council seem to have been playing games with the structure of this planning section, so it's hard to say what is actually there and mis-linked and what isn't here at all.

Thanks for digging those out. I assume the suffix /CND indicates a condition for final approval.  Will have a browse tomorrow...

Paul

I got those two links from the following page on the Council website:

http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decVanilla/RailwayDevelopments.htm (http://www.oxford.gov.uk/PageRender/decVanilla/RailwayDevelopments.htm)

Lots of other links on that page, but they were the two most useful in terms of showing the track layouts.  If anyone can find links to the other drawings, numbered 3001, 3002, 3005, 3006, 3022, 3023, then I'd very much like to see them!

If you put the TWA reference number (TWA/10/APP/01) into Google you can immediately find:

• the inspector's report, which contains all the conditions
• the inspector's Second Addendum Report
• the Secretary of State's "views" letter (more or less a draft of the order)
• lots of planning stuff about the conditions, mostly from Cherwell and Oxford City

What you can't find are the application and order - but the first is a parliamentary bill and the second is (I think) a statutory instrument. Thus both should be on the relevant web sites, though I've not been to look for them.

I've seen all the TWA stuff already, directly from the TWA inquiry site.   I was only asking about how to find the stuff that's on OCC's planning dept site  for conditions to be approved.

Paul

Probably unsurprising, but there will need to be some stock and timetable adjustments to the new timetable ASAP to quell complaints from Bicester passengers.  Apparently more have stuck with Bicester North as starting point for their commute, rather than migrating to Bicester Village, than Chiltern expected.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-34830043 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-34830043)

Not sure I agree with the headline though:

If anything the 'Oxford to London' line actually has more seats available than required by the sounds of it. It's the Bicester North/Banbury passengers that are suffering.

I note "He said changes were being made to timetables and additional carriages, becoming available in mid-December, would make the service "significantly better"."

Where are they coming from?

Adjsutments really not unexpected - very hard to forecast, and it looks like there might have been contingency plans in place in case the switch between stations wasn's as expected.

Good question.  I didn't think the remaining TPE trains for conversion to 168/3s were arriving until next February?

Maybe they'll bring them in pre-conversion & send them away one at a time?

But it isn't a surprise to them - I brought this up in the consultation & asked to see their calculations/estimates of just how many they thought would transfer. Unless they sell car park specific seasons for the Village station, pax won't take the risk of not getting one of the relatively few spaces there & so stick with North station.

And then discussed it at length with the Business Development team. Sorry to say I was proved correct.

There are also capacity issues in the heartlands, some of which they need to address. Changes afoot for all in Dec15 timetable. I just hope they'll consult on it, but I'm extremely doubtful, citing shortage of time.

With something as complex as a railway timetable, and with less than a month to go, a new round of consultation is unlikely in the extreme.

Agreed, but they could give their Passenger Board a weekend to look at it. Members represent the whole route between them

According to the latest RAIL, one of the initial batch of 168/3s is still to arrive from conversion at Wabtec, so that must be the additional carriages they speak of.  All two of them!  Four units still to come early next year and there's also a hint of taking a few more of their stored MKIII's back into service, so longer term perhaps another loco-hauled rake will be brought in, or the present ones lengthened?

And Rail is always right?

Nope, not always.  Makes sense though, with regard to the one unit still to come following conversion - I had thought that all five of the first batch were here already.  168324 is the unit, so as you're a regular traveller, perhaps you can keep an eye out for it?

If those are the 'extra' coaches they are referring to, they'll get loads of complaints as they have already announced them as coming....so effectively double-counting. And they really need the others to make a difference.

Your assumption might be right, I guess. Disengenuous if so, and won't solve their problems in the peak.

Perhaps also some strengthening here and there and weakening elsewhere might also reap some rewards, i.e. if the Bicester Village route is quieter than expected then take some carriages off of that and put them onto Bicester North route services maybe?

Yep...although it'll be difficult as those are generally simgle unit workings, and they won't want to use 165 turbos on that route.

Apparently, the timetable changes are being announced either tonight or tomorrow. Certainly this week, I'm told. But no chance of any further changes

Are these the changes that are shown here for Dec 13th, or were they already online?

http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/download-our-timetable

Paul

No, those are they. Just one extra coach on one train for the overcrowding at Bicester North, I note. The train before is also horrendously overcrowded, as are the xx47 in the evening peak from London. All of which they've left untouched & are obviously hoping to wing it. More changes to come in May timetable I reckon.

At least they'll definitely have those additional 4 168/3s in by then. But it won't be enough.

Indeed, and hence me yesterday referencing the article in RAIL which you slightly scoffed at.

They go on to say that there will be difficulty getting any other 100mph capable compatible units in the foreseeable future (other than the four arriving early next year), with the most likely candidates I can see being the eight Class 172s which London Overground use on the Gospel Oak to Barking route which are scheduled to be replaced with EMUs in 2017/8 which may well be too long to wait - and can that electrification timescale be trusted!  It's also not great having so many 2-car trains without corridor connections and they'd need modifying to increase their speed from 75mph to 100mph.

Hence more MKIII's and Class 68s being possibly the best option, though no doubt a more expensive one.

The word going around Network Rail is they cannot complete the upgrade between Oxford Parkway and Oxford before next September meaning the original intention of extending the train service in March 2016 is unlikely.

No doubt Chiltern will announce it sometime when it suits!

Sadly there are several hurdles in the way, so March is indeed looking less and less likely.  A six-month delay isn't the end of the world though.

I believe one of the hurdles, the planning issues concerning the relocatable train crew building at Oxford (which allows the present building to be demolished and the new platforms built), was finally overcome at a council meeting yesterday.

That just seems to have been a variation application: 15/03087/VAR - passed on Dec 1st.     

It was to extend the allowed period of temporary use from 3 years to 6 years, basically to provide a margin to avoid it having to be removed if the station masterplan is delayed; that work needs a TWA Order.  They presumably wouldn't want to move to another temporary building if the station rebuild is still under way.   I think from the text NR were pushing at an open door - it suits the council's timescales for the station area.

The overall plans for Chiltern's requirements (a 'prior approval' application covered by 15/00096/PA18) were passed on 10th September.

Paul

Yes indeed, the extension from 3 to 6 years was key to the project not being delayed any more.  I understand work will commence early next month.  Not sure it was an 'open door' though otherwise there would have been no 3 year limit imposed at the first time of asking surely?  I also believe that somebody with influence over the council lives very close by, and were using every trick in the book to scupper the plans.

I believe at least one Councillor lives in the houses behind the Said Business School, next to the depot....

3 or 5 years seems to be a standard condition for temporary buildings. 

I'm told that these extra 170s are staying with TPE until the route to Oxford goes live....so nothing more in by May except one additional coach for the blue/grey loco+coaches set

Report into the 'chaos and misery' currently being faced by some Chiltern Railways commuters since the Oxford Parkway timetable.  Just where is 'Btline' when you need him...   ;)

http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/update/2015-12-14/new-railway-has-led-to-misery-for-commuters/ (http://www.itv.com/news/meridian/update/2015-12-14/new-railway-has-led-to-misery-for-commuters/)

To be fair to Chiltern though, missing two units due to damage caused by the storms really does impact upon your fleet availability when things are already a squeeze, and I found it quite ironic that one of the complaining passengers was being filmed on a virtually empty carriage - though he didn't mention overcrowding.  A test for the operator that is held in such high regard.

I've not watched the clip, but the complaints started the day that the Oxford Parkway timetable started & just haven't stopped - I think Chiltern themselves would admit that timetable made assumptions that didn't materialise & was unfit for purpose - along with many NR failures, but their stock allocation & some services just didn't work.

New timetable started yesterday & they promised fixes - but not all problems have been fixed. This is probably well deserved.

It looked as though everyone else had just alighted at Marylebone, and he stayed on to be interviewed.

A quick photo update on the progress on the line upgrade between Oxford and Oxford Parkway:

A view from the temporary pedestrian bridge at First Turn, Wolvercote.  Wolvercote Tunnel that has been causing all the trouble regarding bats can be seen in the background, showing how short it is!

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/2/1445/24041340822_a7e16dc431_c.jpg)


Here's a view of the portal at the other end of the tunnel.  Track will be lower enough to accommodate the W10 freight gauge and electrification.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5739/24149417355_55d368f678_c.jpg)


Here's a view from above that tunnel portal, from the same location as I posted a few months back.  The sound barriers are being built up and the ground has been levelled ready for drainage, ballast and track to be laid.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5749/24149418455_8a68746e00_c.jpg)


Finally, here's a view of Oxford North Junction with the new formation beginning to take shape with two 70mph crossovers eventually replacing the current single 25mph crossover.  You can also see progress on the left of the image on the extension of the Down Passenger Loop from here as far as Wolvercote Junction.

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5769/23781861119_f454387eaa_c.jpg)

Thanks II, very interesting.

Why are the crossovers 70 mph - surely no passenger trains will ever get to 70 mph between Oxford and Oxford Parkway?  Or is it dictated by a Group Standard?

Edit a few minutes later.... Ah, is it to avoid need for approach control?

If you look at the Speed Diagram in the top RH corner of the drawings that II linked to in post 441 of this topic you will see that the EWR lines will be 75mph and as the junction for Chiltern Railway services will in effect be a 'Single Lead' one it needs to be high speed for signalling headway purposes.

A modern electric unit could easily reach 70 by the junction.

After all the 309s used to get to 60 mph  in the length of the platform in their short 65+mph start  stop averages  between stations on the GE main line between Chelmsford and Colchester.

I should have said 75mph, not 70mph.


Indeed, a Chiltern DMU which would initially operate over the crossovers wouldn't make it to that sort of speed, though may well be nudging 60mph by that point, but with an eye on the future a layout at Oxford station that permits full acceleration from the platforms at Oxford and a modern EMU and you'd be looking at 75mph by that point I would imagine.  Coming the other way into Oxford and trains currently on the Up Main can be doing 75mph at that point, decelerating for the station stop at Oxford - and that's with a 25mph approach into the platform.

Presumably, the remaining 25mph crossovers from Down Main to Up Main and Up Main to Up Relief (when routed to the Down Bletchley) will be similarly upgraded for when East-West Rail services commence, hopefully early next decade?

Yes, I can see it makes sense to future-proof these crossovers by installing them now as 70mph (ie on the diverging/joining route), even if the full benefit won't be realised until the Oxford remodelling and electrification north of Oxford is completed (we hope!) in a few years' time.

Also, for East-West rail through freight, a 70mph turnout allows it to clear the Oxford-Banbury line asap.
I assume the Relay Room in the foreground of II's last picture is not long for this world...
(unless someone finds newts or bats inside...)

The relay room being replaced by 4 equipment cabinets the other side of the junction, so it won't be around for long.

Chiltern have just announced a December 12th opening for their Oxford - Marylebone service.

I'm glad they're more confident of no more planning issues coming up than I am - the City Council only turned down plans for the new drivers accommodation last Thursday

Couldn't find this on their planning search weekly list for last week, do you have any other details?

Paul

It's on their site under press releases (http://www.chilternrailways.co.uk/news/chiltern-railways-announces-oxford-city-centre-london-marylebone-launch-date):

Typical Chiltern.  Not even acknowledging that means a delay of over six months to the planned opening, yet alone apologising to those affected passengers.

Mind you, the delay certainly hasn't been caused by a lack of effort on their part!

Is it their apology to make, then? Six months delay will be forgotten after the first week of service.

I've edited my post to clarify that I was asking about the Oxford City planning decision.

Paul

As it's their scheme and they announced the original opening date as Spring 2016 and have waited until late January to reveal what we'd all known for several months, then I would say that's a resounding 'yes'.  Or at least to acknowledge that it's later than originally planned in the press release, rather than totally ignore it to ensure the press release is 100% positive.  Some complain about GWR spin, but I would say Chiltern have even more form in this area!

If I were in charge, I would take it on the chin like a real man, and blame someone else.

Page 105 of the Hendy Update Report (dated January 2016 of course) states that:

Phase 0: enables Chiltern Rail services to commence from London Marylebone to Oxford from September 2016 as part of the East West Rail project, through existing bay platform enhancement.

Perhaps Chiltern are just being prudent in announcing a start date of December 2016, which gives plenty of time for delays, driver training etc.  Maybe the turnround times at Oxford Parkway from May will allow at least some trains to run through to Oxford if the infrastructure is ready before the December timetable change.

As mentioned, the drivers' accommodation block failed planning last week. After that report went to the printers. Thus Chiltern's press release is more up to date.

Can you give more information on that, Chris.  I thought the train crew block at Oxford had passed the final planning hurdle with work set to start next month - the closure of the staff car park being the first step?

Not seen anything on the web about it - but various railway managers discussing it since Friday - both GWR & Chiltern. A quick search of the City Council planning weekly list throws nothing, but I wonder how quick they are to update. Interesting

Interesting indeed.  I was under the impression that the only outstanding issue was with regard to the noise barriers in Wolvercote/Cutteslowe.

A briefing document was issued to staff yesterday (making no mention of any more delays) regarding the construction of the bay platforms at Oxford.  Principal timelines are as follows:

1)  Short Stay/Disabled parking relocated to the Becket Street Long Stay Car Park:  15/02/16 to 03/01/17
2)  Removal of parcels wagons in east dock platform and demolition of dock platforms canopy:  13/02/16 to 24/02/16
3)  Bay platform construction works: 29/02/16 to 16/09/16
4)  New 'temporary' building construction (phase 1 for GWR):  16/03/16 to 19/07/16
5)  Demolition of current staff block: 30/07/16 to 10/08/16
6)  New 'temporary' building construction (phase 2 for M&S/SSP/Rail Gourmet):  11/08/16 to 09/12/16

Key for the new service of course is that bay platform construction works, scheduled to finish on 16th September.  Not sure if that's the date everything is commissioned for use, or just when construction finishes, but there will obviously need to be a period of route learning for the drivers after that as well, so no surprise the opening has been delayed until the December timetable change date.  Even if if was ready a couple of weeks before that date, there's little point going to the hassle of having a revised timetable for such a short time.

And there's still some points/signals work to do - maybe included in the Hinksey works block?

According to Oxford City Council's planning portal (http://public.oxford.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=NWM48TMFLMQ00), the application for:


was approved on 1 December 2015. Have I missed something here?

Yes, alterations to the track and signalling at both Oxford station and Oxford North Junction need to be completed by the end of the year.  Staged weekend possessions might be enough, though taking advantage of longer blockades might well be utilised.

Not sure if there's a better place to post this, but I used Oxford Parkway yesterday and was pleasantly surprised at the amount of the car parking capacity in use, at around 1300 I would think the carpark could have been 70% full?

I'm not convinced they have the number quite right for blue badge holders though, there's a huge number marked out for the three or four actually in use.   Suppose this is a common feature of modern car park design though...

Came back from High Wycombe on a 2 car 168 that was pretty much full and standing as far as Bicester Village, but even then about half the passengers carried on to Parkway.

Has anyone heard what the passenger numbers are generally showing?   Encouraging generally?

Paul

Or maybe the law? The number of disabled spaces always appears grossly out of proportion with those actually in use.

Railway, thus private, land. There is no statutory requirement that specifies minimum disabled parking space provision. The Equality Act merely requires reasonable adjustments to accommodate those with protected characteristics.

Whilst there's no specific legislation regarding parking provision for those with protected characteristics, there is guidance published by the British Standards Institute. That guidance may be persuasive in law for any dispute about lack of provision.

I don't think it's much use for disputing over-provision though. That is subjective after all.

Whatever standard or 'Standard' that is used, it does proscribe the number of disabled spaces as a % of the total.

I have heard the figure of 4%, minimum 4 spaces, used in the context of supermarket car parks. If that were used at Oxford Parkway, it would lead to over 50 disabled spaces. That would probably be over-egging the pudding. Without making sweeping generalisations, many disabled people with a blue badge - and possibly a Motability vehicle - would drive to their destination, so not using a station car park. The balance is probably therefore very different to Tesco or Sainsbury, where a greater proportion of people arriving by car are likely to have a blue badge.

It's worth pointing out that a Blue Badge confers no automatic special privilege in car parks on private land.

Lack of one seems to convey special penalties, though. Arguably.

An aquaintance of mine reported that he attended the Wem bly Oxford U. match a week or so back. He occasionally uses GWR C.L. servicves but he was travelling with a nephew who wanted to try out Chiltern from Parkway. He says that they arrived on the Sunday morning at aropund 10.30 to find a long queue of 50 or more cars entering the car park but that Chiltern had staff all around the car park directing drivers where to park so it took only a few minutes as it was so well organised. There was plenty of friendly and helpful staff all around the station and two trains at the platform coping well with the large numbers of travellers. At Wembly, there was also staff directing people to the stadium. He says he was impressed with the quality of the train appearance, for both comfort and cleanliness and would not hesitate to use Chiltern again in future. Obviously Chiltern made a special effort on that day but it would appear to have paid off in creating a good impression. Another aquaintance also attended but had travelled on a coach direct from Hanborough and whilst the journey there went smoothly, their coach was stuck for two hours at Wembly queuing to leave the stadium after the game and they did not get home until 20.30 whilst another rail traveller he knew had got home hours earlier so he reckons if Oxford U. get to the promotion playoffs at Wembly in a few weeks time he will also try the Chiltern train.

A few friends of mine also used the Oxford Parkway to Wembley Stadium service and a few others used chartered buses and all reported exactly the same thing.  Chiltern very well organised and super quick, the coaches were fine there but big hold-ups on the way back.

Good work from Chiltern, though their operation should be slick as they get plenty of practice with the regular events held at the stadium.  I've only had the chance to use them once from High Wycombe for a gig a few years back and was mightily impressed then - certainly a far, far better way of reaching many destinations than the walk slow shuffle down Wembley Way to Wembley Park.

Think Chiltern have a capacity for around 10,000 people in the first hour leaving Wembley, which is about a quarter of those those that go to Wembley Park. As you might expect, everything is a lot more packed after an event than before.

The queues for the various north bound destinations are segregated, although there is somewhat of a problem for Haddenham and Thame Parkway where the Birmingham trains will sometimes stop but the designated queue is for nearer terminating services. They do though sometimes call for Haddenham passengers to switch.

I also see that the Oxford Parkway trains after an event have a number of near London stops (Northolt Park, South & West Ruislip etc)

They carried in excess of 12,000 that day from Oxford Parkway alone....

Would be interesting to know what percentage of their total revenue Wembley Stadium events contribute to Chiltern.  It must certainly have been missed during the rebuild between 2000 and 2007.

The vast majority are simply MYB-Wembley shuttles, so not very much in total. It's only if a Birmingham team (or now Oxford) reach Wembley, that'll be when it takes off.

It is noticeable that if it is an evening match only a few shuttles are put on before the match. Some of the longer distance trains have stops added at WCX that are not advertised at MYB and which in the time table are pick up only, but the people with Club Wembley complimentary rail tickets are directed to use them.

There is also a dedicated train for the use of only for Club Wembley members to and from both London and Birmingham when it is a 'core event'.

Not so - the longer distance in the peaks don't stop at all & theose in the counter-peak direction do and are advertised as such.

Which doesn't contradict what I posted above which related to trains from MYB before an evening match and those not to MYB. Although I do suppose we may differ on what is considered to be longer distance with Chiltern Railways as I was thinking of any that weren't WCX shuttles in this context ;D

Incidentally a DID-WCX ticket is valid via London or Banbury at present. Just slightly different routes ...

Long(er)-distance onj Chiltern are those that run beyond Princes Risborough towards Bicester....

Some photos of the Oxford Parkway to Oxford progress at Wolvercote.  Not a massive amount of visible work done, since my last set were taken, but further progress on the sound barriers and the embankments either side of the formation have now been constructed.

The first two are viewed from the recently re-opened First Turn bridge looking towards Oxford - the view looking towards Oxford Parkway was blocked off by hoardings sadly:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7249/26583457654_6667ee1bec_c.jpg)

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7135/27093916502_62e9fa80b5_c.jpg)

These last two were taken from the northern portal of Wolvercote Tunnel:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7118/26583455814_ce917c808f_c.jpg)

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/8/7133/27093914882_bf15b3e36f_c.jpg)

I'll return later in the year when the track has been laid.  The bridge which overlooks Oxford North Junction is also out of action until the summer whilst the approach to it gets modified, so as soon as that opens I'll pop along and take some more of the junction, which is really starting to take shape.

Many thanks for, firstly, getting out there and taking those pictures and, secondly, posting them here for our information, IndustryInsider.  ;)

Track laying complete:

http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/oxford-to-marylebone-track-now-complete

Not quite the case as a couple of small sections still need to be done near Oxford North Junction, but it would now be possible to avoid those and run a train all the way with a bit of jiggery-pokery!  ;)

I've noticed one of their Turbos being sent down daily over the last few days to do some route learning, with many shunts south of the station also being covered.  Looks like the longer peak trains are booked into and out of platforms 3 and 4 come December (and will need to shunt), so I'm guessing by then Platforms 1 and 2 will only be partly finished and open for use by trains of up to three (or perhaps four) carriages?  That will put extra pressure on the two busy through platforms at Oxford.

The planning (permitted development rights) approval I was looking at a while back showed the rebuilt bays as 5 and 6 car; but then I've also heard they will both be about 160m.  Presumably though if they are to continue running the LHCS services as they do now they at least would definitely have to use a through platform.    I'd have thought other than LHCS though most trains will be 6 car (say 140m) or less?

I thought I saw some pictures somewhere suggesting the new bay platform structures were almost completed?

Paul

Yes, they'll be 6-car length (perhaps even 7?) when complete, but although the far end is progressing nicely, at the near end the old traincrew block is still being occupied (until next month), let alone demolished and work has barely started on the section that was the old short stay car park.  They'd be going some to get that all finished in the less than three months that remain.  At the far end, platform 2 (the old bay platform), is open to three car length currently, with platform 1 being built.

Reattimetrains has the 06:43, 07:20, 07:44, 19:20 and 20:00 departures for Marylebone off of either 3 or 4 (with a similar number of arrivals using 3).  The rest use either 1 or 2 in similar amounts interspersed with the odd GWR service to Banbury.

NR has promised Chiltern that the two bay platforms 1 & 2 will be 6car & ready by 11 Dec. I was present at the time.

There are two 9car & 1 silver LHCS running at the moment in the AM and 1 9car & 1 LHCS in the evening. These will all shunt via Hinksey Yard & likely leave from platform 3 - so an Up train leaving from the down platform.

OK, well - we'll see!  When did they promise that?  If so I predict the platforms will be held together by blu-tac and sticking plasters!   :D


Platform 4 you mean.  And yes, it joins Exeter St. Davids in being the only GWR stations where London trains will depart in opposite directions from the same station.

Yes, I meant platform 4....but 3 is possible too, the shunt becomes complicated, but could be done if necessary...it was explained at rhe same time as the promise was made. This was a NR drop-in session at the Said Business School week before last now, I think

Yes, 3 is the quoted platform for the 19:20 with the other four all booked from 4.  Certainly going to have a bearing on punctuality having an extra seven trains a day using 3 and 4.

Oxford Mail report:

http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/14756650.New_track_linking_Oxford_and_London_complete_and_set_for_December_launch/

What about Westbury?

yep, I guess so now.

Westbury's an excellent thought.

How about Yeovil Pen Mill?

Yeovil Pen Mill? Are there through trains in each direction?

Through *Up* trains in each direction, that is?

I stand corrected on both counts!   :D

An award for Oxford Parkway:

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/rail-features/2016/09/22/national-rail-awards-2016-medium-station-of-the-year-winner-oxford-parkway

A cheeky one, but how about Termple Meads once IEPs start running via Bath and Parkway?

They wouldn't be 'departing (from the platforms) in two different directions', would they?

Paul

Indeed - and why wait for the IEP as there's already an HST from Temple Meads to London via Parkway at around 04:47

About 10 years ago there used to be two trains departing New St every hour at exactly the same time for Scotland. Moreover, some hours  the train for Glasgow would be the east coast routing, and the one for Edinburgh up the west coast. The day I caught one they were going from adjacent platforms too.

I dread to think how many people caught the wrong service each day.

Very tenuous I know, but Reading, during the Paddington blockade, would have qualified............ with GWR trains from the Westcountry reversing and heading for Waterloo via Basingstoke, whilst SWT continued to run services to Waterloo via Wokingham.

Talking "Scotland" ... try multiple trains leaving from Motherwell for Glasgow Central at the same time - fast ones and slow ones, with (when I was there) the only way to know which to catch being to ask. Kinda important when headed for an ongoing connection that only one made!

An update to my pictures shown on page 35 with the situation as it was earlier today.  All looking good for the December launch with just a bit of tidying up work to do, a bit of ballasting, and some signals to install:

Looking south from First Turn bridge, Wolvercote.  Ballasting still needs to be done on the 'Down Bletchley', but everything else looking pretty much complete:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5562/29340260163_e6ec6d5e78_c.jpg)


Two views north from the same bridge, showing Wolvercote Tunnel.  Again, a few final bits of work to do to the track, but otherwise not far from complete:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5192/29339532384_6f35303995_c.jpg)

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8089/29883791041_a3784bc327_c.jpg)


Here's the northern tunnel portal, with workers busily finishing off an access staircase.  You can clearly see the track lowering required for electrification in the future (along with freight clearances) as the previous single track was roughly level with the concrete cable troughs you can see disappearing into the tunnel:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5643/29340260693_420b89ceaa_c.jpg)


Two shots of the view looking north from the tunnel portal, with the second clearly showing the new Down Bletchley to Up Bletchley crossover.  I believe this crossover was repositioned from the original plans to try to appease the locals:

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5058/29673231620_b0d9542700_c.jpg)

(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5665/29340257713_03f7f57b37_c.jpg)


Finally, this is looking south from Oxford Parkway station, with temporary stop blocks still in place:

(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8717/29966930275_13ecf38fb0_c.jpg)


Some more pictures, taken by Cliff Jones, a few days ago can be viewed here:  http://cliffjones.zenfolio.com/p323911479

Thanks for the update II.

I can see why they called it Evergreen!  ;D

PS Hopefully they might sort out the graffiti on the bridge before December.   >:(

At the risk of making the Pedants' thread, one goes east, the other north.

that's the right hand track....looking south


This time looking north, but you are still referring to right track to left track crossover - I believe you mean Up Bletchley to Down Bletchley (I think)

See attached for NR's track diagram

They still depart from any particular platform end past the same signal.   We are talking here about up and down with respect to the same platform(s)...

Paul

Yes, it could easily be described as that as well.  That's the trouble with bi-directionally signalled areas as I think moves will be possible in both directions over that crossover.

N ot 'as well' as NR decrees the up & down descriptions and as I have shown, you are right in the top example but confused in the second....see the attached map for the right descriptions

It is 'as well' in that a train leaving Oxford Parkway's down platform towards Oxford and using that crossover will be travelling from the Down Bletchley to the Up Bletchley - though I am assuming that move will be possible?  It would seem silly if it isn't.  Therefore it could be described as either - even if my choice is not NR's official description (which is not shown on the map you attached).

That map is clearly marked which line is which - as you look towards Oxford, Up is on the left (the top line on the map) & the bottom of the two is marked Down Bletchley - which would be on the right looking south towards Oxford.

Chiltern will revert to the traditional 'drive on the left' once Oxford is open, so will use the Up Bletchley to Oxford, crossing over to the Up Relief once approaching Oxford & thuus into Platform 1 or 2.

Leaving platform 1 or 2, seems as though they will again use the bi-directional Up relief to reach Oxford North Junction & thus across onto the Down Bletchley to reach OXP on the 'right' platform (the one on the left looking towards BIT)

As EWR doesn't go towards London, I guess NR had to choose which would be which.

According to the map, initially (until Phase 1 is complete), they'll actually also cross over to the 'down Bletchley' for a short while before joining the 'up Jericho bi-di' not the 'up relief'.


Again, according to the map, they'll use the 'up Jericho bi-di' not the 'up relief' before the vast majority will take the route you describe - though I don't think there would be anything stopping them using either sets of crossovers once they get onto the 'down Bletchley', so they could cross over to the 'up Bletchley' and proceed to the other platform at Oxford Parkway.

Difficult to make descriptions unambiguous when you have bi-directional signalling, isn't it!  Ironically, the crossover we've been discussing probably won't be used very much anyway!

\Errr....phase 1 should be complete before December 12....according to NR.

That's Phase 0, Chris.  Phase 1 work has barely started.

You're right - I need to check with my NR contact how much of Phase 1 needs to be complete for DEc 12.

None of Phase 1 needs to be complete, (though work has now started).  Chiltern's service can operate, on a slightly more restrictive basis than the final layout, as long as Phase 0 is complete.  Both phases are available to download on this page:

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/great-western-route-modernisation/oxford/

Which map? The one I attached? That's phase 1....but as you correctly mention below, it's phase 0 to bbe complete by Dec 12. On the phase 0 map you mentioned, it's clearly marked 'Up Relief'. so I think you are mistaken. It will be called that on completion of phase 0.


See above - by Dec 12, it's called Up Relief.

I think it's going to be called 'Up Relief' from Wolvercote Junction to Oxford North Junction, then 'Up Jericho Bi-Di' or something very similar from Oxford North Junction to Oxford station.  Either way, I'll confirm when I know for sure.

I know for sure - from NR's Project Senior Sponsor....which is where my info came from initially, but now have it in writing


I suspect he's a reader on here :-)

Thanks for that confirmation, ChrisB.  The Phase 1 map is indeed correct then - I hadn't spotted it was differently labelled on the Phase 0 and Phase 1 maps.  Do we know if it will be called that from the completion of Phase 0 this December to the Completion of Phase 1 in 2018?

I've asked the question....

Well that's very strange because on the Signalling Scheme Plans its called the 'Up Oxford Relief' and it extends all the way from Wolvercote Junction to Hinksey North (in the final layout).

Is that *after* Phase 1 is complete? Because that is what we are discussing :-)

It is what we're currently discussing, although you did state it was 'Up Relief' from Dec 12th a few posts ago.

And I suspect SandTEngineer is looking at something that is current. It may well be called that now, but we're discussing either post Dec 12, or post Phase 1. Why would the Signalling Scheme Plans show future names?

I think the signalling scheme plans he has privileged access to are plans for the future that those responsible for delivering the upgrades work to.  'Up Oxford Relief' does tally with the 'UOR' label on the opentraintimes map.

Certainly that line has never been the 'Up Relief' so far.  It was called the 'Up Goods Loop' until mid-2009 when a small signalling scheme meant its name changed to the 'Down Jericho' which is what it was called until the current upgrade work started.

Wow, Chris B looks as if he might be in the wrong. Is this a first ?

I strongly doubt it this time :-)

Well, all I can state is that on the Phase 0 and Phase 1 final TVSC signalling scheme plans that I have seen its always shown as 'Up Oxford Relief'.  Currently, as Industry Insider has stated above, it is called the 'Down Jericho'.

Of course there is a small chance that the plans might be out of date (they are dated September 2015) but the naming seems fairly consistent throughout  ;)

Wot I thought.

There is also an Oxford Phase 2 which is the addition of the 'Down Oxford Passenger Loop' and Platform No.5 together with some additional crossovers (but that is nothing to do with the Chiltern Oxford service).

No, I wasn't.  A record of the current signalling at a site is called a 'Signalling Plan', 'Signalling Diagram', 'Domestic Diagram' or in the case of ex-WR lines a 'Locking Sketch', and is shown in black.  Future works are shown on a 'Signalling Scheme Plan' and show retained works in black, recovered works in green and new works in red (and sometimes future optional works in blue or dotted blue).

You have been very quite since we challenged your post.  Any more info to say we are wrong?

quiet, even.

I answered the challenge in the quote you used. I have that in writing /email. I'm happy.

From out of the ether, I got a reply to my question....

Pleased to report that the old traincrew block has finally been vacated last night and staff transferred to the new 'temporary' building behind what will be the new platform 1.  This should have happened in late July based on original timescales, so is about three months late.  It does at least mean they can get on with demolishing the old crew building and rebuilding that section of the new platforms in the race to get things ready for 9th December.

Chiltern should receive the line for driver training at the end of November, I'm told - leaving 10 days for training

While that doesn't sound very much, many drivers could be trained "on the job", with a driver-trainer (DSM - driving standards manager?) boarding at Oxford Parkway, and effectively "conducting" the driver the rest of the way into Oxford, and back again; the driver-trainer then changes platforms at Oxford Parkway and then conducts the next train.

Indeed, and as they're only learning a few miles from Parkway into the city, it should be fine.

Yes, I don't think that would present much of a problem as it's a short section and the last month or two has seen drivers learning the various shunt moves around the station which is far more complex.

All sorts of heavy machinery moving about bits of demolished train crew accommodation at Oxford at just before 10pm this evening, and making a right racket.  Bet that's gone down well with the nearby neighbours!

from NR';s Oxford newsletter -


The residents had better get used to it....

And I feel sorry for them.  24/7 working at a location so close to housing should not be allowed just because a project has fallen so far behind.

How much of the falling behind has been due to delays in starting while NR responded to objections by the same neighbours, eventually found by the planning process to be unjustified?   

"Own goal" is the first phrase that springs to mind.

Paul

Would these be the same neighbours who bought new flats backing onto railway sidings only, to complain when they realised that they weren't empty at night, but full of DMUs with diesel engines running by any chance?

Reminds me of the acquaintance at university who was renowned as a light sleeper, who proudly announced the location of his new house, right next to the railway line in Cardiff. When questioned on the wisdom of this, his reply was that the only trains using the line were squitty little things that stopped running reasonably early. Didn't have the heart to tell him about the coal trains with squealing brakes that used the line through the night, I believe he was on sleeping pills within a couple of weeks and moved out before the end of the first term. 

No, these are townhouses much nearer the station where the new platforms are being built.


For the one person with influence (and any others) that tried to put all sorts of spanners in the works, I agree.  I feel sorry for those that have just shrugged their shoulders and put up with it and are now faced with a month of constant noise, and NR certainly won't be endearing themselves to them one bit.

Finally seen it confirmed in enough official places to confirm it is going to be called the 'Up Oxford Relief'.  SandTEngineer was right.  ChrisB, his contact within NR, and my original suggestion were wrong.

According to the Open Train Times maps test running/driver training has commenced today (21 November 2016) between Oxford Parkway and Oxford.

Hmmm, interesting - must just be to the 3car platform 2 plus the other movs within the station - platform 1 & the extension to platform 2 aren't finished yet....

I wonder who trains the driver trainers? :-)

Yes, really interesting as I have just watched a test train (5T22) go into and out of Oxford Platform No.1. ::) :D

They are also testing movements to/from the Oxford Up Carriage Sidings and Hinksey Reception Line.

Progress over the weekend - there was little track in that platform 1 last Friday.

Geoff Plumb has added three pics to his site of a Chiltern unit on the section near Wolvercot tunnel:
https://plumbloco.smugmug.com/Trains/November-2016/i-4Tdd8kQ

Paul

With signalling commissioned the footpath at Aristotle Lane has finally closed.  Much upset to allotment owners who now have to take a slight detour over a new bridge.

However a major improvement for lots of local residents as whistle boards associated with the crossing have now been removed.  They might not notice too much difference in the short term though, as workers still need to be warned of approaching trains as they finish off the Oxford Corridor Phase 0 works and continue Phase 1 works recently started.

Wow, that's a lot of yellow fencing. Presumably what H&S demands these days when you have rebuilds.

Incidentally, does anyone know if the support for future electrification goes as far as mast bases installed, or are there just gaps where they can be planted as required?

Just passive provision.

Ta

The full length of Platform 2 (six cars) at Oxford is being commissioned this weekend, with Platform 1 set to follow on the day of the new service starting.  Still a fair bit of work to do on it and I imagine it will still be a bit of a mess for a few months after whilst several bits of work are completed - the canopy for a start.  Not the sort of impression Chiltern would have wanted to present to its passengers, but I guess getting it open on time is the important thing!

There apears to be a height difference between platforms 2&3, with a ramp construction at the north end with a step currently closer to the overbridge. Wasn't expecting that...

I knew a light sleeper who always woke up with a light on.

I can't finish that joke...

It seems there are quite a few light sleepers in Oxford:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-oxfordshire-38259667

Better to be a hard sleeper.

Another local article on this:

http://www.thisisoxfordshire.co.uk/news/14954327.City_council_bosses_assure_North_Oxford_residents_they_are_standing_up_to_Network_Rail_as_the_firm_gets_set_to_breach_planning/

From the

They would have to be very quick doesn't the service start next week?