East Coast Mainline Blockade for Werrington Junction diveunder

[Titan]

4 minutes ago, melmerby said:

It's 6.4km (4 miles) as the crow flies from the cathedral spire to the highest point (over the A15) of any possible flyover.

That's hardly next door.

 

It is very flat countryside round there, the flyover would have been clearly visible from the Cathedral as well as many other locations  miles away unless foggy and vice versa.

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Richard E said:

 

There is also an issue in that local developments are not supposed to diminish the impact of the cathedral by being significantly higher, something the local planning committee seem to have forgotten ...

Half the height and 4 miles away, hardly going to diminish the impact.

[Crun]

 

 

Werrington Junction work site and trains 3/11/21. A YouTube film by Barrie Donoghue

Edited November 18, 2021 by Crun

[phil-b259]

On 09/11/2021 at 20:37, Titan said:

 

A flyover would not have worked, as the gradient would be too steep to get under the A15.  It was looked at how high and long the flyover would need to be if it went over the A15 instead, but as the A15 is already on an embankment that is significantly higher than the ECML it would have put the flyover on an elevation that made it the highest point for miles around, including the top of Peterborough Cathederal, not to mention how much would be required for the embankments/supports, how much longer the site would need to be etc etc

 

The A15 could have been rebuilt to traverse the railway at a higher level - and as its a new town area said A15 is not hemmed in by buildings preventing an offline new bridge being built while the old one stayed in service.

 

No, the REAL issue with a flyover is the visual intrusion aspect (of either it or a raised A15 road or both) - something which has nothing to do with engineering and everything to do with social attitudes.

 

Now don't get me wrong I'm not decrying such measures, as with environmental issues it shows we have advanced from the Victorian era where it was basically the money and status of influential individuals which shaped what physical construction was considered acceptable.

 

However thats not the same thing as an engineering constraint - and you cannot ignore that from a pure design, build and maintain point of view a railway flyover would have been a much better option than a dive under. Thus if not constrained by modern non engineering related planning rules the likelihood is a flyover would have been built instead.

[Titan]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

The A15 could have been rebuilt to traverse the railway at a higher level - and as its a new town area said A15 is not hemmed in by buildings preventing an offline new bridge being built while the old one stayed in service.

 

Do you have a source for this? Are you aware of how high the road would have to be to clear the new track?

 

Rebuilding highways is also problematic and expensive, they are also governed by maximum permissible gradients for example as well as other regulations.  If, as is likely the original A15 bridge was built at the maximum grade allowed for that type of road, then any raising would also necessitate a substantial lengthening of the of the approach to gain the extra height.

[phil-b259]

40 minutes ago, Titan said:

 

Do you have a source for this? Are you aware of how high the road would have to be to clear the new track?

 

Rebuilding highways is also problematic and expensive, they are also governed by maximum permissible gradients for example as well as other regulations.  If, as is likely the original A15 bridge was built at the maximum grade allowed for that type of road, then any raising would also necessitate a substantial lengthening of the of the approach to gain the extra height.

 

Yup - but you are missing the point.

 

Digging piles and erecting bridge structures is A LOT simpler than inserting a box that lies below the water table under the ECML!  A bridge / viaduct structure is also pretty much a 'build and forget' structure where as the dive under has required an expensive set of water management to be fitted and which will present an ongoing maintenance burden.

 

Thus if you remove all the visual and environmental restrictions modern planning rules put in place (i.e. use the framework the Victorians would have been working under) then even with the extra cost of raising the A15 and its approaches  (or building a new section of A15 right next to the current road - something which there is PLENTY of space to do if you don't have to worry about chopping down trees or visual intrusion / traffic noise) a flyover would come out as the best engineering option.

[Titan]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Yup - but you are missing the point.

 

the dive under has required an expensive set of water management to be fitted and which will present an ongoing maintenance burden.

 

 

You are right to remind me!, I had temporarily forgotten just how much engineering was required on that score alone.  There were some exceptionally difficult challenges to overcome.   

[Crun]

Friday 12th November 2021

 

Views from Serjeant Way using mobile phone:

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by Crun

[Crun]

Views from Hurn Road Bridge using a DSLR camera:

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2021 by Crun

[Crun]

Views from the Lincoln Road Bridge using a DSLR camera. Not sure what the boxes are leant against the armco fence:

 

 

The pile of earth has been there for a week or more:

Edited November 13, 2021 by Crun

[Donington Road]

Another week gone by at the main site.

 

 

[melmerby]

I wonder when acceptance trials start?

As far as we can see all the work directly connected to the new railway has been finished, so there shouldn't be any reason not to start.

[Donington Road]

54 minutes ago, melmerby said:

I wonder when acceptance trials start?

As far as we can see all the work directly connected to the new railway has been finished, so there shouldn't be any reason not to start.

 

There is still fencing to be completed to make the railway secure.

[Crun]

Sunday 14th November

 

Views from Serjeant Way showing where the pile of soil is being used:

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Crun

[Crun]

Views from the Cock Lane bridge. Soil piles and soil spreading:

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 14, 2021 by Crun

[MGNorthern]

On 06/11/2021 at 12:42, great central said:

 

I believe there used to be a flyover in the same area to take the M & GN over the ECML although I've only seen scant mention of it and no pictures. A Google search doesn't bring up anything as far as I can tell

 

There are a few photos around.

• http://www.eyepeterborough.co.uk/heritage/railway/
• https://www.peterboroughimages.co.uk/?s=rhubarb+bridge

There is more about it in the book Peterborough to King's Lynn by Middleton press.

[Crun]

There's an article by Tom Allett on the dive-under in the next Rail magazine out on the 17th of this month. It states in the article that the naming of the opening date was imminent as it went to press.

‐‐----‐-----------------------------------------

From another forum:

 

"Is the dive under coming into service with the winter timetable on Sunday 12th Dec? If so, does anyone know what the first service is likely to be?"

Edited November 15, 2021 by Crun

[Crun]

4 hours ago, Crun said:

There's an article by Tom Allett on the dive-under in the next Rail magazine out on the 17th of this month. It states in the article that the naming of the opening date was imminent as it went to press.

‐‐----‐-----------------------------------------

From another forum:

 

"Is the dive under coming into service with the winter timetable on Sunday 12th Dec? If so, does anyone know what the first service is likely to be?"

An answer on that other forum:

 

"That's still the plan, as far as I am aware!

 

Probably nothing until the Monday, as there is no freight booked to run via Spalding on a Sunday,
unless there is to be a special 'inauguration' working to break some strategically placed banners
on the Sunday?"

[Zomboid]

Will the passenger service not switch over too?

Edited November 16, 2021 by Zomboid

[ess1uk]

53 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

Will the passenger service not switch over too?

doubt it

except for diversions

[Zomboid]

I see the up slow is reversible, so if there's capacity there it won't get in the way of the main line and it'll depend which platform they're aiming for.

 

You'd think that a few trains would go from 6/7 for route knowledge purposes even if they normally use 1.

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Zomboid said:

Will the passenger service not switch over too?

No planned to do so, as the only passenger service to/from Spalding direction comes and goes on the up slow/reversible and terminates in Peterborough.

 

Those coming from from the GE line don't go off towards Spalding. The EMR trains carry on up the GN mainline and XC go on the Midland line to Stamford and GA terminate at PBO

Rail tours, of course, might use the diveunder.

[melmerby]

A good example of why the dive under is needed was about a week ago when a freight coming from Whittlesea direction and due to be routed via Spalding was sat in platform 6 awaiting the road up the GN main line to Werrington.

Behind it was a XC service to Brum but it couldn't enter it's platform (7) because the freight was fouling the crossover south of the station and was delayed 10mins as a result.

In future the freight would just use the Stamford route and diveunder and be out of the way before the XC service arrives.

[Crun]

Passing Peterborough on a Grand Central Class 180 16/11/2021. A YouTube film by ECMLexpress. Views of the dive-under at speed:

 

Edited November 16, 2021 by Crun

[ess1uk]

how overgrown this section of line is