Report backs £200m Cotswold Line upgrade

[whole diary]

[charles_uk]

I've not seen this mentioned elsewhere (mods - do delete or whatever if I'm being blind) but a letter in the Times today drew me to this:

http://www.clpg.org.uk/blog/cotswold-line-200m-upgrade-plan/

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-01-22/debates/88C42150-6CD6-49E9-BF68-16AE39F55D22/NorthCotswoldLine

An interesting read, even if it is only ever an aspiration.

[IndustryInsider]

I did mean to post that on here but forgot.  I think it's much more than an aspiration.  The key will be to get it on the list of projects on the Rail Network Enhancements Pipeline, with the 'Decision to Initiate' stage almost able to be skipped so it can go straight to the 'Decision to Develop' stage if the Government stumps up half of the funding required, amounting to £1.5m.  If there's political will, a well organised group behind it, and a good business case it's surprising how quickly things can move.

The Taskforce's document can be downloaded here.

[SandTEngineer]

Crikey.  Isn't it amazing how we are having to put back what was taken away all those years ago in the 1970s.  I remember many happy days of travelling along there behind Hymek and Warship loco hauled coach trains at 90mph+ All double track and mechanically signalled.

[grahame]

https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2020-01-22/debates/88C42150-6CD6-49E9-BF68-16AE39F55D22/NorthCotswoldLine

From Chris Heaton-Harris, the rail minister, answering the debate.

Actually, there is way more demand for investment than the initial £500 million that we, as a political party, put in our manifesto and thought would be required. We will be able to pick some amazingly excellent and viable schemes, which are deliverable in short order, to reopen Beeching lines, and obviously there will be a geographical spread across the whole country. I very much hope to announce more details on that in the near future, but I hope that, for now, that answer will suffice for the hon. Gentleman.

Hmmm ...

a) I wonder why they missed the level of the demand when they were already in Government

b) Delighted to hear there will be a geographic spread - the was far from obvious to me with so much talk of the North and Midlands, and how it would bring them up to(wards) the level of London and the South East.  No previous mention of the South West - of the need for extra capacity on the north Cotswold line (as per the debate),  on the Salisbury - Exeter line, or between Chippenham and Trowbridge.

[Witham Bobby]

Crikey.  Isn't it amazing how we are having to put back what was taken away all those years ago in the 1970s.  I remember many happy days of travelling along there behind Hymek and Warship loco hauled coach trains at 90mph+ All double track and mechanically signalled.

And with a full restaurant car on some services, or, at least a buffet.

But far fewer trains.  It all became a bit disastrous after 1974, when the Class 31s came along to "replace" the D7000s

When I was a (very young) signalman at Moreton in Marsh I used to tease one or other of the Area Manager's team by asking how much extra was being spent in terms of delays, and brake blocks and fuel with the slowings and/or stops for token purposes, compared to the savings on maintenance on the lifted track.  Mostly, they didn't like it.

[JontyMort]

Crikey.  Isn't it amazing how we are having to put back what was taken away all those years ago in the 1970s.  I remember many happy days of travelling along there behind Hymek and Warship loco hauled coach trains at 90mph+ All double track and mechanically signalled.

And with a full restaurant car on some services, or, at least a buffet.

But far fewer trains.  It all became a bit disastrous after 1974, when the Class 31s came along to "replace" the D7000s

When I was a (very young) signalman at Moreton in Marsh I used to tease one or other of the Area Manager's team by asking how much extra was being spent in terms of delays, and brake blocks and fuel with the slowings and/or stops for token purposes, compared to the savings on maintenance on the lifted track.  Mostly, they didn't like it.

Indeed, that is always the objection to singling. You spend money to produce (say) one third (?) of the original capacity for (say) two thirds (?) of the original maintenance cost, then spend more money putting it all back again.

I can’t download the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) paper referred to. Are they really talking about re-doubling from Evesham West only to Pershore rather than Norton Junction? Here’s an idea. Restoration of the second platform at Pershore would be very difficult. So redouble throughout but just use the siting down platform at Pershore for both directions with crossovers. The ridiculous idea of opening Parkway with only one platform instead of redoubling the couple of hundred yards from Norton will end in tears.

[IndustryInsider]

It would be good to have the additional benefits you describe.  The problem is you have to make something vaguely within a realistic budget and the solution(s) the document details do provide for the service enhancements that were the objectives of the Taskforce's remit. 

If we're looking at £200m for what they've proposed (which will no doubt rise!), then if you added the second platform at the new Parkway station, with lifts and so on as well as a single span bridge that would need replacing between Pershore and Worcester, as well as signalling changes that would be needed at Norton Junction then all of a sudden the price rockets up to £300m or more and it becomes an unrealistic price for little extra benefit on what the £200m would get you.

[ellendune]

I can’t download the CLPG^» (Cotswold Line Promotion Group - about) paper referred to.

Nor can I and someone else who has put a comment on the page. The publicity would probably have more impact if the report could be read.   

[JontyMort]

It would be good to have the additional benefits you describe.  The problem is you have to make something vaguely within a realistic budget and the solution(s) the document details do provide for the service enhancements that were the objectives of the Taskforce's remit. 

If we're looking at £200m for what they've proposed (which will no doubt rise!), then if you added the second platform at the new Parkway station, with lifts and so on as well as a single span bridge that would need replacing between Pershore and Worcester, as well as signalling changes that would be needed at Norton Junction then all of a sudden the price rockets up to £300m or more and it becomes an unrealistic price for little extra benefit on what the £200m would get you.

I agree it is never easy. At the other end, redoubling to Hanborough does look a good idea. I think I read somewhere that the key to the timing there is the renewal of Wolvercot Junction.

[SandTEngineer]

It would be good to have the additional benefits you describe.  The problem is you have to make something vaguely within a realistic budget and the solution(s) the document details do provide for the service enhancements that were the objectives of the Taskforce's remit. 

If we're looking at £200m for what they've proposed (which will no doubt rise!), then if you added the second platform at the new Parkway station, with lifts and so on as well as a single span bridge that would need replacing between Pershore and Worcester, as well as signalling changes that would be needed at Norton Junction then all of a sudden the price rockets up to £300m or more and it becomes an unrealistic price for little extra benefit on what the £200m would get you.

But the trouble is II, that this country always ends up doing things in 'bits and pieces'. Eventually the whole line will end up being redoubled at three times or more of the cost of doing it all properly now......

[PhilWakely]

But the trouble is II, that this country always ends up doing things in 'bits and pieces'. Eventually the whole line will end up being redoubled at three times or more of the cost of doing it all properly now......

Going slightly off topic, but to illustrate the statement............. A local council has the choice of spending £50 for a temporary repair to a pothole that will last for 12 months or £150 for a more permanent (10 year) solution. Inevitably, because of budget constraints, they will choose the £50 solution and spend £500+ instead of £150 over 10 years. Everything in government is short-termism (except where the government knows that it will be somebody else's problem way down the line (e.g. HS2^▸ (The next High Speed line(s))) ).

[ellendune]

But sometimes phased improvements are the best approach.  Trying to rush GW^▸ (Great Western) electrification increased costs.  Now the roof of Temple Meads and Bristol East Junction are being done in advance of electrification at much less cost.  The key is to have an effective long term plan with stages so that the amount of abortive work is the minimum. 

So getting back to the North Cotswold Line, filling in the remaining double track at the East end needed to wait for both Oxford resignalling (or do I mean relocking or recontrol?) and as II says need to wait for Wolvercote Junction to be renewed. What would be bad is if Wolvercote junction were not improved to provide the short stub of double track to start things off. 

[IndustryInsider]

So getting back to the North Cotswold Line, filling in the remaining double track at the East end needed to wait for both Oxford resignalling (or do I mean relocking or recontrol?) and as II says need to wait for Wolvercote Junction to be renewed. What would be bad is if Wolvercote junction were not improved to provide the short stub of double track to start things off. 

I didn't actually say that.  Wolvercote Junction isn't due for renewal until 2040, and there's no problem with Oxford signalling any more as it was sorted last year.  The big stumbling block at the Oxford end is Combe and Finstock with the cost of adding another platform at Combe and demolishing the existing platform at Finstock and replacing it with two new platforms - that or the politically sensitive alternative of closing them both.

Like I said, to achieve what the Taskforce set out to do (two trains per hour each way), then they only need to do the bits they've proposed.  A £200m scheme is much more likely to get approved than a £300-400m one.  I agree with all the short-termism comments - If the Stratford-Upon-Avon line ever opens then they'll have to be another phase of work - but unfortunately that's the way things are, and I'm not sure it's specifically a 'this country' thing.

[ellendune]

Like I said, to achieve what the Taskforce set out to do (two trains per hour each way), then they only need to do the bits they've proposed. 

It would be nice to know what they do propose as the link to the document still does not work. 

[IndustryInsider]

Should be available to download on the supporting documents section at the bottom of this page:

https://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/CDP-2020-0004