Jump to content
 

East West rail, Bletchley to oxford line


Recommended Posts

Posted on another forum that they're taking the WCML crossing part out piers and all (I suspect the whole thing would collapse if struck by a derailed train at speed) and replacing with a rectangular structure aligned with the WCML tracks, with EWR tracks crossing roughly from corner to corner.  

  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 hours ago, Edwin_m said:

Posted on another forum that they're taking the WCML crossing part out piers and all (I suspect the whole thing would collapse if struck by a derailed train at speed) and replacing with a rectangular structure aligned with the WCML tracks, with EWR tracks crossing roughly from corner to corner.  

Will it acquire a tunnel designation?:jester:

 

Measuring on a map it is going to be approaching 100m long

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Today's activity saw the second section on the lift being lowered ready for demolition. You can see daylight underneath it in the first shot.

 

The third removed section was being moved by the large crane in readiness for transporting to the slings. Two large road trailers were in position ready to transport it down to the vacant space to the right of the lift. Demolition of the first section looks to have taken around three days.

20200506_162415.jpg

20200506_162329.jpg

  • Like 14
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 1E BoY said:

Today's activity saw the second section on the lift being lowered ready for demolition. You can see daylight underneath it in the first shot.

 

The third removed section was being moved by the large crane in readiness for transporting to the slings. Two large road trailers were in position ready to transport it down to the vacant space to the right of the lift. Demolition of the first section looks to have taken around three days.

20200506_162415.jpg

20200506_162329.jpg

This is fantastic, what happened to the second span? Did that get demolished? Is there 4 sections out or 3?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

Three sections out so far.

 

Second section ready for demolition (will probably start tomorrow), third span is the one on the end of the crane jib being readied for movement to the section behind the two Penny vans seen in the bottom picture.  The lifting gear appears to run on rails or beams (I can't get any closer to check!). There are certainly beams in the picture which can be seen between the two yellow Penny vans which the jacks move along.

 

All my shots are taken from the public highway during my daily permitted walk. I believe section 4 is coming out over Saturday night / Sunday morning but that is not official information. The next two appear to have been cut ready and they will be over the WCML requiring a possession (see picture below taken yesterday)

 

The work is certainly causing a few people to stop and look at it during their walks. Many of course, including yours truly, can remember being taken to see it going up.

 

A check on all the official websites still indicate that the flyover is only being refurbished. To me it looks like total replacement! 

 

The pictures taken by helicopter last Thursday (above) show two spans down - the third is the one behind the crane jib which was removed last weekend. 

20200505_154102.jpg

  • Like 7
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I went past here this morning and I saw nothing yet. I did see the the third section is now off the hook of the crane but no demolition on section 2 and 3.

 

However I did notice that they are removing the columns as well as the bridge sections. 
 

I have no pictures though I’m afraid

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

As anticipated the second section is now in position ready for breaking up and the third section is now on the lifting slings behind it.

 

Leaflet delivered this morning through the door by Network Rail. It indicates the parapets will be removed on the section over Water Eaton Road over the weekend of 16th/17th May with the road closed.

 

It also indicates a week of overnight closures of Buckingham Road during the week 18th - 22nd May for parapet removal. Closures in place 2030 - 0700. In the current situation this is unlikely to cause any major road disruption!

 

The leaflet gives the impression that only some sections are being removed and replaced particularly those over the West Coast Main Line.

20200507_154348(0).jpg

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

On ‎06‎/‎05‎/‎2020 at 12:37, Edwin_m said:

.............................................. (I suspect the whole thing would collapse if struck by a derailed train at speed) .....................

 

I thought it already had been hit by a derailed train, I seem to remember a DS freight derailing on the crossover that used to be just south of the flyover, and knocking big lumps out of one of the middle piers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
15 minutes ago, Ray H said:

Wasn't there a similar one with an up light engine when the driver took the diversionary route a tad too fast?

 

He missed the Flyover and came to a stand on the Up Fast just south of the Flyover.

 

Maybe this one https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoE_Bletchley1974.pdf ? Rear coach hit Flyover support.

Edited by Pannier Tank
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
On 06/05/2020 at 12:37, Edwin_m said:

Posted on another forum that they're taking the WCML crossing part out piers and all (I suspect the whole thing would collapse if struck by a derailed train at speed) and replacing with a rectangular structure aligned with the WCML tracks, with EWR tracks crossing roughly from corner to corner.  

 

Its quite possible the original piers could have been strengthened (several early motorway bridges have had this done in recent decades) were that the only issue at stake.

 

The bigger issue is more likely related to the need to build new platforms (and associated structures) on the viaduct (remember current standards dictate the track should be as level as possible) and widening / erecting a parallel structure top accomplish this would be problematic.

 

Thus I can well believe that taking down the flyover and installing what amounts to a large concrete raft over the WCML makes the whole business of building the new platforms far easier as well as removing the possibility of the old flyover suffering issues in future years.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Its quite possible the original piers could have been strengthened (several early motorway bridges have had this done in recent decades) were that the only issue at stake.

 

The bigger issue is more likely related to the need to build new platforms (and associated structures) on the viaduct (remember current standards dictate the track should be as level as possible) and widening / erecting a parallel structure top accomplish this would be problematic.

 

Thus I can well believe that taking down the flyover and installing what amounts to a large concrete raft over the WCML makes the whole business of building the new platforms far easier as well as removing the possibility of the old flyover suffering issues in future years.

 

 

I don't think this is to do with the platforms, because the are some way away from the WCML span, and incidentally on a gradient.  But I do agree it looks like a wise precaution to sort of the WCML span properly before it becomes much more difficult to do so.  

Edited by Edwin_m
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 minute ago, Edwin_m said:

I don't think this is to do with the platforms, because the are some way away from the WCML span, and incidentally on a gradient.  But I do agree it looks like a wise precaution to sort of the WCML span properly before it becomes much more difficult to do so.  

 

When I say platforms, I mean the new EWR ones (not the existing WCML ones) - which under modern regs have to go on the bit of line that passes over the WCML due to modern requirements regarding minimising gradients.

 

That said I haven't seen definitive plans for the EWR station so could be wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Its quite possible the original piers could have been strengthened (several early motorway bridges have had this done in recent decades) were that the only issue at stake.

 

 

Many early motorway bridges had quite flimsy columns, some even metal tubes, one strike from an HGV and the whole bridge would come down.

So they have built barricades to deflect wayward vehicles:

https://goo.gl/maps/aUVnKqYq49vrFdL2A

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

When I say platforms, I mean the new EWR ones (not the existing WCML ones) - which under modern regs have to go on the bit of line that passes over the WCML due to modern requirements regarding minimising gradients.

 

That said I haven't seen definitive plans for the EWR station so could be wrong.

 

This image https://www.ice.org.uk/ICEDevelopmentWebPortal/media/Events/Lectures/east-west-london-railway.jpg?ext=.jpg suggests that the Platforms do not  extend that far.

  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

How does the junction on the viaduct fit into the equation?

That picture throws up more questions than it answers.

It seems to show the platforms across the current junction!

 

The distance from the current junction to where the viaduct crosses the WCML is about 170m.

Surely 170m is not enough to fit in a decent length of platform?

What length of train is envisaged?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

The current junction for Fenny Stratford and the Bedford Line is opposite the old L&NWR goods shed now an aggregates terminal).

 

It is shown on this video here

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDe8x0n6TP4

 

The Fenny Stratford line goes straight ahead with the locomotive taking the line to Denbigh Hall Junction where it will join the WCML.

  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

This video takes the line to Fenny Stratford (starting around the 10 minute mark)

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTs_MNELWdw

 

Both videos start from the current run round loop by the Newton Road bridge which carries the main road between Bletchley and Newton Longville. It also forms the boundary between Milton Keynes Borough and Aylesbury Vale local authorities.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

When I say platforms, I mean the new EWR ones (not the existing WCML ones) - which under modern regs have to go on the bit of line that passes over the WCML due to modern requirements regarding minimising gradients.

 

That said I haven't seen definitive plans for the EWR station so could be wrong.

Answered by posts quoted below.  New platforms on gradients are permitted, possibly even if the train reverses or crew leave it for other reasons, but probably requires risk assessment for each case.  Platforms on curves are much more problematic due to stepping distance issues, and I suspect a platform on a vertical curve where the ends slope in opposite directions would be much more hazardous from the train driving point of view than one on a constant gradient.   

3 hours ago, Pannier Tank said:

 

This image https://www.ice.org.uk/ICEDevelopmentWebPortal/media/Events/Lectures/east-west-london-railway.jpg?ext=.jpg suggests that the Platforms do not  extend that far.

That's a much more useful visualization than the one I've seen previously, as it shows the entire platform.  

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

How does the junction on the viaduct fit into the equation?

That picture throws up more questions than it answers.

It seems to show the platforms across the current junction!

 

The distance from the current junction to where the viaduct crosses the WCML is about 170m.

Surely 170m is not enough to fit in a decent length of platform?

What length of train is envisaged?

Posts on another forum suggest the junction is being moved north off the end of the platforms (and re-handed so straight is towards MK).  This will involve changing the gradient profile of (probably) the Bedford line, as the two currently diverge vertically as well as horizontally.  I think this means the platforms sit (at least partly) on the wider formation north of the current junction.  

Edited by Edwin_m
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
24 minutes ago, Edwin_m said:

Posts on another forum suggest the junction is being moved north off the end of the platforms (and re-handed so straight is towards MK).  This will involve changing the gradient profile of (probably) the Bedford line, as the two currently diverge vertically as well as horizontally.  I think this means the platforms sit (at least partly) on the wider formation north of the current junction.

 

Sounds possible as there is quite a bit of railway owned land between the two lines which would enable the junction to be relocated. There is quite a bit of tree clearance going on in the area bounded by the B4034 and by the roundabout that leads into Princes Way which may or may not have something to do with it.

 

The trees have grown a bit since this picture was taken in 1973 and the fence is a lot stronger!

 

 

4472 on Bletchley Flyover.jpg

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...