An Imaginary Proposal - Norwich and West Norfolk

[Satan's Goldfish]

I sometimes have a problem with an over active imagination.

 

Those that know me will know that my dream money and space no object layout would be based on Norwich Thorpe in the 80s. I'll often have little hunts around the internet in my spare time looking for images and information on rails around Norwich present and past. Over time I've seen various news articles and documents covering transport issues and proposals, some more realistic than others! This has lead to me coming up with my own thoughts on the matter which I've outlined below and covers as many of the things I've seen as possible.

 

This isn't a 'I think we should invest millions into building this' thread, and I'm not after 'it'll never happen' responses, I'm aware people can be nightmares and this would never be built. What I'm after, other than just sharing my thoughts, is whether the thinking behind the proposal is realistic for a modern transport solution rather just 'dreaming'. As such I have tried to take cost and interference with people's daily lives into account. The main piece of information I'm lacking is topography info for where new build lines would be, but as Norfolk is not renowned for its mountain ranges I can't see that being too big an issue.

 

 

So here we go; to catch the train from Norwich you have to go into the centre, this creates road traffic. There are calls for an out-of-city station option for those wanting to catch the train to London etc. Traffic around Norwich in general can be quite busy and at times the main ring road can take a while to get around. The newly opened Northern Distributor Road (NDR) is probably a good indicator of where new residential estates will start to stretch out to and this will create even more of a traffic issue to the north of the city. Also, the busiest part that the NDR could have relieved between Taverham and Longwater wasn't built due to 'environmental concerns building a dual carriageway across the Wensum Valley'. Next, traffic along the A47 corridor from Kings Lynn to Norwich is not good and can be quite slow. The chances of it all ever being dualed is slim. For those that don't drive, there is a bus...

 

There are a lot of bus services in Norwich, Park and Ride use is encouraged, but even so those buses have to share the roads with the rest of the traffic which can slow them down quite a bit.

 

The existing rail situation in Norwich is as below, just routes in from other locations. Same for Kings Lynn:

 

 

 

A major issue with Norwich rail is the restrictions caused by the single track Trowse swing bridge which has to cope with all the London and Ely route traffic and is currently at near maximum capacity. There have been talks to replace it with a double track bridge at very large expense.

 

My proposal would be to create a semi-orbital suburban system that would link several of the Park and Ride locations into the existing Norwich Thorpe station, and a rebuilt Norwich City station on the former M&GNJR route to Melton Constable. Plus a new line partly using disused rail bed from Kings Lynn to the new Norwich City station.

 

As a new build, it would all be electrified at 25Kv overhead to reduce the use of diesel engines (and pollution) in and around the city. Abellio are procuring class 755 bi-mode Stadler FLIRTS anyway, this order could be added to or some electric only versions specifically for the Norwich suburban services could be used to help keep fleets uniform.

 

Connecting to the Park and Ride locations would reduce the number of buses running into the city. Also, with correct pricing incentives, those wishing to catch longer distance trains could be encouraged to use the Park and Rides as well to connect with other services. This would also reduce the amount of traffic trying to get into the city centre.

 

Maps below do not have the station names on, but the block diagram showing track layouts at the bottom does.

 

Around the city in an anti-clockwise direction; first there would be a simple shuttle from the Postwick Park and Ride (along side the existing lines to Gt Yarmouth/Lowestoft) to Norwich Thorpe. This would capture most of the London bound commuters from the east of the city as well as those heading in for shopping. Distance wise it's not much further to Brundall and Brundall Gardens stations so traffic levels pending there could be the option of electrifying out to them for the shuttle service to capture more traffic.

 

The 'Bittern Line' to Cromer would gain a station that sits between the Dussindale Housing estate and the Broadland Business Park. Just north of this would be a double track junction where the new line starts which follows the edge of the urban Area to it's next station at Sprowston Park and Ride, this serves both the car park and housing area. After that the double track continues to the edge of the Norwich Airport Industrial Estate where it reduces to single track and enters a tunnel. This tunnel leads to the airport terminal where it serves both Norwich International Airports inspiration of being busier, and the neighbouring Airport Park and Ride. The station at this location would also need to be in the tunnel but is 2 platforms. 

 

From the Airport Park and Ride, the single track tunnel continues under Hellesdon following a road above for easier cut and cover construction, the location of the tunnel under the road being such that in the future if the track needs doubling it would leave space under the other half of the road. Single track tunnel is a much cheaper option than trying to run this all as a double track section. There would be a single track platform just before the end of the tunnel serving Hellesdon. 

 

The tunnel ends where the line meets the Wensum Valley but remains single track to cross the river to minimise it's environmental impact. The line then joins the former M&GNJR route which is double track into Norwich City station. The end of the tunnel would unfortunately mean the purchase and destruction of a house to fit.

 

The former M&GNJR route is currently being used as the Marriots Way foot and cycle path so some resistance to losing that must be expected and provision should be made to placate it's users. City Station is a terminus so all services must reverse or terminate there. It may be a good idea to provide the option of a cord from the Hellesdon tunnel to the other 2 lines serving Norwich City station so there is a bypass option. Station layout and Hellesdon Junction covered later.

 

 

The other suburban line that leaves City station is double track for its whole length and heads around to it's first station at Costessey after leaving the former M&GNJR route. From there it continues out of the city to a station that serves Long Water Industrial estate, the Park and Ride, and the Norfolk Show Ground. This would relieve a lot of traffic in that area, especially when the show ground is in use.

 

From there it curves down to a station at the large village of Hetherset before joining the existing line to Wymondham. The station layout at Wymondham would be modified to provide a 3rd platform where the current freight loop is, and the sidings would be electrified to provide some unit stabling.

 

The routing of the suburban lines is such that if other suburbs decide they also need stations then they could be easily added at convenient locations rather than being in the middle of a field. For example; Thorpe End and Catton on the Airport route, and Bawburgh on the Long Water route.

 

 

The Wymondham - Norwich City line could also provide some relief to the Trowse swing bridge situation by re-routing some services on the Ely line into City station instead of Thorpe. Also there becomes the scope for a competing (open access operator?) Norwich - London service that runs City - Ely - Cambridge - Kings Cross if paths allow at the London end (That bit probably is very wishful thinking, but would provide Norwich passengers with much quicker and easier to access to places like St Pancras International).

 

The final line out of Norwich City station would be the new line to Kings Lynn along the A47 corridor. This would be double track from City station and follows the M&GNJR route. The first station would be at Drayton, and next station would be at a new Park and Ride at the end of the NDR road serving Taverham just after the line leaves the former M&GNJR track bed. There would be a regular shuttle service from the Park and Ride to City, also stopping at Drayton. The line singles at the Park and Ride in order to reduce costs, however the majority of the route to Kings Lynn should have the necessary alignment and signalling to allow 90mph+ running.

 

 

The new line heads west across country, crosses and then runs alongside the South side of the A47. It becomes double track again for a couple of miles as it approaches Dereham to create a dynamic loop. The station at Dereham would be in the vicinity of its big Tesco. Bridge over the Mid Norfolk Railway still alongside the A47. Leaving Dereham, the line is single track. At this point the A47 follows another former rail bed that heads all the way to Kings Lynn. Leaving Dereham there is still space to the South of the A47 to run a line as the builders left plenty of space to build a dual carriage way but never did, and after a few miles the A47 leaves this alignment anyway.

 

 

Next along the line still following the former track bed is Swaffham. The former station site has a couple of minor structures blocking it that would need removing. The line would double at Swaffham station and remain double until reaching a station at the next village of Narborough where it would single again. This would create another dynamic loop about 3 to 4 miles long.

 

 

The former track bed eventually reaches Middleton Towers where it is still in use as a freight only line for trains from the sand quarry. This would then need electrifying to complete the route to Kings Lynn. 

 

 

All pictures knitted together:

 

 

And the block diagram showing track layouts and station names. The platform lengths quoted are just representative; if the train of choice is a 2 vehicle EMU then it's fine, but if it's a 3 vehicle FLIRT then it would make sense for platforms listed as 4 coach to hold 2 FLIRTS in multiple (6 coach). Norwich Airport station is twice that length for 3 reasons; it helps massage the airport's ego, as the only loop along the single track tunnel it would allow longer trains to pass, and if required longer trains can use the station.

 

Platform lengths at City station are also to be worked out around the same method, plus there's a longer platform to cater for any eventuality, e.g open access operator uses 2+8 HSTs to get to London Kings Cross. The double track from City station to Hellesdon Junction would be bi-directional on both tracks to enable simultaneous arrivals and/or departures from any route. Looks like a lot of track when I've been trying to be as restrained as possible but triple track between the 2 would be even more complicated and I can't think of any other way it could cope with the potential of a train heading in each direction at least every 10 minutes to cover long distance and suburban bus like services (4tph suburban service + 2tph longer distance x all 3 routes = 18tph departing + 18tph arriving = 36tph moves at Norwich City Station)

 

 

The thinking behind the possible North cord at the junction is it would allow infrastructure and freight to not need to reverse in the station. Plus depending on how the services are worked on the Kings Lynn line it would allow them to start from Thorpe instead of City. For example, if the service is 2TPH from Kings Lynn to Norwich, then 1 train could be an 'express' that only stops at kings Lynn, Swaffham, Dereham, and City. The 2nd train would stop at all stations from Kings Lynn, avoid City but stop at Airport on its way around to Thorpe, and then continue on as one of the services to Gt Yarmouth or Lowestoft. Reversing at City in that scenario would add a lot of time to the journey from Kings Lynn to Gt Yarmouth/Lowestoft and remove the time advantage the train would otherwise offer.

 

 

 

So that's the thought process in my head. Anything I've majorly messed up on or is not realistic? (Edit that; more unrealistic than the whole unrealistic idea!) Any thoughts from the more experienced in this field or options/issues that I've missed? I think I've covered everything, but if I realise I've forgotten anything I will add it. Like I said at the start, this isn't a solid proposal that needs 'it won't happen' responses, it's more a project in realistic thought processes and overcoming practical issues I've missed.

 

Thanks

[TravisM]

Looks awesome and nothing wrong with a over active imagination lol. You now just need the space and money to do it lol.

[russ p]

In the late 80s the council commissioned a study into reopening railways round here

The route into city is actually protected ( or it was back then ) for a railway up to Themelthope and a new curve to the line to county school

The Lynn to dereham route was deemed to built upon

An odd one that was protected was wymondham to forncett

I had the full survey but I think I've lost it which was a shame

I like your idea except for the new units

[beast66606]

Looks interesting.

 

Some of your track plans need some more thought but I'm assuming they are concept rather than exact ? - I would expand each location to it's track and signalling plan at some stage.

 

Shame you didn't have an Eccles Road Parkway

[Satan's Goldfish]

In the late 80s the council commissioned a study into reopening railways round here

The route into city is actually protected ( or it was back then ) for a railway up to Themelthope and a new curve to the line to county school

The Lynn to dereham route was deemed to built upon

An odd one that was protected was wymondham to forncett

I had the full survey but I think I've lost it which was a shame

I like your idea except for the new units

  

 

Hi Russ,

 

I've always found the old Norfolk rail routes a bit rubbish, they seem to meander a lot and take a long time to get anywhere rather than being fast and direct. Also, the most recent 'in the press' proposal that springs to mind was for a new town near North Elmham, the developer said the MNR would be used to improve transport links... sorry, but how is a 25mph heritage railway a good competitive transport link?!

 

The heritage railways in the area do a good job of being just that, so I deliberately avoided any interference with them, even the Norfolk Orbital project which is why I routed the Kings Lynn line down to Dereham Rather than up to Fakenham.

 

The full survey might be an interesting read, but i thought you may say that about the new units

 

 

Looks interesting.

 

Some of your track plans need some more thought but I'm assuming they are concept rather than exact ? - I would expand each location to it's track and signalling plan at some stage.

 

Shame you didn't have an Eccles Road Parkway

Morning!

 

Yes the track plan is a bit rough, just overall concept rather than actual. To get more detail and spacing would need a proper look at the geography on the ground so I deliberately kept it as compact as possible. Lots of island platforms on the new build to reduce space and construction costs.

 

Hmmm, Eccles Road Parkway... how many bridges does the Breckland line go under between there and Wymondham that would need rebuilding for OLE clearance?...

[Satan's Goldfish]

Looks awesome and nothing wrong with a over active imagination lol. You now just need the space and money to do it lol.

Hi Jools,

 

This is really a 21st century 12"/1ft proposal rather than a model... although the main station and junction is growing on me a bit as a model, would just need a bit of back dating...

 

Cheers!

[Zomboid]

I don't know Norwich at all, but is it really big enough to need a 4tph suburban heavy rail service? That Northern arc would be more realistic as a Tram-Train, so that long tunnel could be done away with and replaced with a more awkward but probably more affordable surface alignment..

It would prevent using that route for anything else, but on the other hand it could then also run through the city centre and directly link City and Thorpe stations. The multi voltage requirements could be interesting, as I don't think anyone's buying 25kV Street running. Might be simplest as 25kV/ battery units.

[russ p]

The problem with Norfolk's railway is that it never had the network it needed.

Basically what it needed was rail routes following the A47, A140 A11 and A148 and a possible add on of the A149 which would probably have closed by now.

North walsham would need a branch from the A140 route and that just about links most towns

Not heard of the new town near north Elmham , but there was talk of a new eco town near rackheath which was to be rail served and cars would not be allowed in, then they built the northern distributor road ( to nowhere) through it!

[Satan's Goldfish]

I don't know Norwich at all, but is it really big enough to need a 4tph suburban heavy rail service? That Northern arc would be more realistic as a Tram-Train, so that long tunnel could be done away with and replaced with a more awkward but probably more affordable surface alignment..

It would prevent using that route for anything else, but on the other hand it could then also run through the city centre and directly link City and Thorpe stations. The multi voltage requirements could be interesting, as I don't think anyone's buying 25kV Street running. Might be simplest as 25kV/ battery units.

I had similar thoughts when I was playing around with it in my head and pondered tram-train for the northern section. Being tram-train would keep it double track all the way around, however it would then become stuck with all the other traffic around the A140 Cromer Road at the airport and suddenly the speed advantage has gone. Looking at the google earth image, the tunnel length is probably less than 3km, mostly 'simple' cut and cover just below the road surface. Building the tram sections would involve taking the road up anyway, but both sides rather than just 1. As for the 4tph guesstimate, that's based around a 15min interval from the Park and Rides to keep them competitive (I think that's roughly what buses run to at the busiest times but I'd have to double check that)

 

The other thing to keep in mind is that while the majority of use would be short suburban services, all the imagined routes also support a few long distance heavy rail services; the northern arc is less obvious for this but there are long distance bus services going from Gt Yarmouth/Lowestoft to Kings Lynn/Peterborough so the custom for that journey is there already. Building as heavy rail to accommodate that, the Kings Lynn line, and the Ely line and then adding a few short FLIRTs (They almost look like trams anyway ) on top to relieve existing bus routes would probably be a better way of looking at it. Just more expensive than viewing it solely as a light suburban network.

 

Ref running a tram-train across the city centre to join the 2 stations... getting that 'approved' would probably be less likely than the rest of this combined. I thought about it, and as useful as it would be there's just too many historic buildings and streets in the centre that it would interfere with, and the city centre actually has some short but surprisingly steep (for norfolk) slopes.

[beast66606]

  

Hmmm, Eccles Road Parkway... how many bridges does the Breckland line go under between there and Wymondham that would need rebuilding for OLE clearance?...

 

Spooner - just the one, so cheap as chips. (Assuming the A11 was built with clearance, probably not)

 

Mmmm, chips ...

[Satan's Goldfish]

Spooner - just the one, so cheap as chips. (Assuming the A11 was built with clearance, probably not)

 

Mmmm, chips ...

It's like you know what I had for lunch...

[Satan's Goldfish]

Ref track layouts, specifically City Station and Hellesdon Junction, I've drawn them up below showing some of the various simultaneous move options between the 2. Practical? I have no idea how this would be signalled! (that's not a topic I've researched yet). There's not unit stabling options at City Station due to space restrictions, but it's not far to get units back around to Crown Point in time table gaps if need be.

 

 

 

 

[beast66606]

Whats the logic behind the little loop at the junction ? - is it long enough for a train to stand ?

[Satan's Goldfish]

Whats the logic behind the little loop at the junction ? - is it long enough for a train to stand ?

Simultaneous arrival from Kings Lynn direction and arrival/departure to/from airport direction... I did have design issues with whether it's worth it or not but the design is a mirror of the junction at Reedham that seems even more redundant. Although, making it long enough for a unit to stand seems a good idea, cheers!

[Satan's Goldfish]

I was out and about yesterday and had to drive the A47 from Dereham to Broadland Business Park so paid attention to things along the route. The terrain to the south of the A47 east of Dereham is fairly flat and smooth, just a few gentle undulations, with plenty of space to run the line. There's a couple of bridges that cross the road (foot bridge, farm access, etc) that would need extending to cross a rail line too. The line would have to head north of the A47 towards Taverham roughly where it becomes single carriageway, after this the A47 becomes less smooth and direct with several side roads. The route off towards Taverham however looks fairly flat and clear.

 

One part of the Google earth route I've never quite been happy with is how 'unsmooth' it looks around Longwater. Driving through long water has shown that location on top of a bit of a hill and it may make more sense to 'cut and cover' that part and Longwater station into a tunnel as a long deep cutting would be required to get the alignment under the A47. More expense which is not good, maybe more feasible as another single track section with a passing loop at the station, similar to the Airport tunnel? But it smooths out the track alignment a lot by being able to run it under the golf course. Thinking of traffic levels during days that the show ground is in use, if it is a single track tunnel then a longer platform at the passing loop may be beneficial.

 

 

Original drawn alignment in Pink, revised tunnel in Yellow.

[Fenman]

The problem with Norfolk's railway is that it never had the network it needed.

Basically what it needed was rail routes following the A47, A140 A11 and A148 and a possible add on of the A149 which would probably have closed by now.

North walsham would need a branch from the A140 route and that just about links most towns

...

I’d agree with most of your road choices, but I’m curious why you left off the A10 (mirrored by a rather busy piece of real railway!).

 

It reminds me of the Norwich-based councillor so thrilled a couple of years back that the A11 had finally been dualled, so that “Norfolk” was now connected all the way to London by dual carriageway. As if anyone from the entire western half of the county would drive across to Norwich and then head south. Norfolk is big.

 

In fact, Norfolk often suffers from a miniature parallel version of the problem England has with London.

 

Norwich =/= Norfolk!

 

Paul

Edited November 11, 2018 by Fenman

[SED Freightman]

An interesting proposal, from a simple cost perspective I would suggest separating the system from any Network Rail involvement and perhaps look at more surface / street running with off the shelf light rail vehicles running off 750v overheads.  Adoption of light rail practices would also reduce issues arising from new / re-opened level crossings and possibly other structure and gauging issues.  A separate depot facility would be needed as I believe Crown Point will be pretty much full once the mainline stock currently on order for existing services is delivered. With regard to the Middleton Towers - Kings Lynn section, the sand loading facility now occupies the former trackbed and would be rather expensive to relocate, a slight deviation around the sand terminal would be relatively easy using light rail, which could then parallel the existing freight line (not sure if this was once a double track formation) back to Kings Lynn.

[Satan's Goldfish]

Still playing with this in my head. I've revisited various bits in order to make it as 'viable' as possible. While light rail is certainly an option and would generally be cheaper to build, I still feel that heavy rail has benefits, especially with the relief to the existing Trowse Swing Bridge bottle neck and providing longer cross county route options such as a direct Gt Yarmouth to Kings Lynn without having to swap to get across the city. Trams in Norwich on certain routes would be useful as a separate scheme though.

 

So for the time being I've kept to heavy rail. I've revised the block track layout plan to take into account the single track tunnel at Longwater. This introduces another bottleneck to timetable around, but it would fairly easy to leave the space for a second tunnel bore here to run the second track all the way through. Longwater station has also been lengthened to create a decent length mid-tunnel loop, plus provide extra capacity for showground traffic during events there.

 

I also noticed on Google Earth that I'd gone a bit wrong with the Airport Tunnel. Running cut and cover underneath the road through Hellesden to Airport P+R station is still the best way to avoid the traffic, but continuing the tunnel would make much more sense under the airfield itself rather than trying to negotiate its way under the industrial estate (revised route in yellow). The digging cost and inconvenience factor to traffic as well as other utilities will be much lower by routing under the airfield, plus the alignment is smoother.

 

 

The layout of City Station has a revisit too. I'm assuming the Industrial estate between Heigham Street and the river would have been the original station and goods yard site so there's not much land left at the edge to build the station. It's narrow at the roundabout where the very end of the station would be and widens as it follows the curve of the river. So I've removed one of the tracks from the station, the platform on the river side only has 1 face used now so the weight of trains is kept away from the river bank but the platform can be built out over it if needed. The stager of platforms 2 and 3 helps make use of the widening of the area and allows platform 1 to accommodate either 1 long train or 2 short ones without the one at the buffers being blocked in.

 

The junction has also had a revisit. City Station to the Junction would be bi-directional on both lines. The stager from the tunnel is still there but the narrower line on the plan would be optional depending on traffic levels. Without it, it would be single track from City Station to Airport with no passing opportunities, with that join then there is passing opportunities plus a short loop a train could be held in. The split between the Kings Lynn and Wymondham lines has also been changed and now has a diamond crossing, but the point work to help with Bi-directional running for the last stretch to the terminus.

 

The probably completely unnecessary 3rd side of the triangle is still there too. I imagine if there's 2 trains per hour from Kings Lynn then 1 could terminate at City and the other would avoid City and head to Thorpe before continuing to Gt Yarmouth or Lowestoft. There's other rare possible functions for it, it probably wouldn't see as much use as the rest of the track on the proposal but even 1 TPH during the day is more than some existing lines in other places!

 

 

 

I feel a couple of stock stabling sidings near City Station would be useful but I don't know the terrain and space between there and the Junction to add them. The alternative would be sidings out at Taverham station as there is more space and it doubles up as a through/terminus for 2 functions aswell.

 

Finally a revised total route map just as a refresh on the whole scheme. No loop around Middleton Towers drawn on yet...

 

[Fenman]

In case you’ve missed it, Norfolk County Council has just launched a public consultation on proposals to create public footpaths/ cycleways over some disused railway lines, including some ex-M&GN line that you replicate:

https://www.norfolk.gov.uk/out-and-about-in-norfolk/norfolk-greenways

 

Lynn-Hunstanton also features, along with Lynn-Fakenham

 

This follows the success of Marriott’s Way, a footpath covering the route of the M&GN from the site of Norwich City station to the lovely market town of Aylsham.

 

One of these proposed paths would run opposite my house, which would be lovely for me. I’m a fan of the proposals, especially since they would work well with the existing network of long-distance footpaths.

 

Paul

[uax6]

Interesting. The ideas are probably sound, but sadly I fear that the existing heavy rail may not be able to cope with what you are trying to do. For instance King's Lynn Junction and station is now quite restricted, indeed a new carriage siding is in the planning process and that is going to go down alongside the Middleton branch, with a link to the main (so avoiding the switchback into the yard). This may well give you a good link to get onto the Middleton from the station in the future....

Sadly Lynn station is very cramped now. It has, to the laymans eye, four platform faces, nos 1&2 in daily use for punters, platform 3 is a carriage siding, and there is a face opposite 2, which cannot be reused, as even if track was relaid into it, the boundary of the railway is less than 3 feet from the platform face, and therefore unusable.

A major change in stabling would be required to allow 3 to be brought back into use, along with heavy re-laying of the track in the whole station area...

 

If you were going to go ahead with the Lynn- Norwich branch it would probably be worth linking it across to Wisbeach, thereby opening up another corridor for freight to avoid Ely. A triangulaur junction at Lynn Junction would allow freights to avoid the reversal in Lynn yard, and along with re-doubling between Lynn and Maggy Road, this would be a material gain, the single line sections on the Elyy Lynn line being big restrictions to capacity.

 

Andy G

[Johann Marsbar]

Just found this thread!

 

Several years ago, a report was produced by a Light Rail Transit Association member who lived in the Norwich area into his proposals for a light rail network for the City, using several existing and disused railway alignments. As an LRTA member living in East Anglia, I was sent a copy and I still have it somewhere. Will have to try and find it...........

[Satan's Goldfish]

In case you’ve missed it, Norfolk County Council has just launched a public consultation on proposals to create public footpaths/ cycleways over some disused railway lines, including some ex-M&GN line that you replicate:

https://www.norfolk.gov.uk/out-and-about-in-norfolk/norfolk-greenways

Lynn-Hunstanton also features, along with Lynn-Fakenham

This follows the success of Marriott’s Way, a footpath covering the route of the M&GN from the site of Norwich City station to the lovely market town of Aylsham.

One of these proposed paths would run opposite my house, which would be lovely for me. I’m a fan of the proposals, especially since they would work well with the existing network of long-distance footpaths.

Paul

 

 

I had briefly seen something about that. I enjoy a good footpath and used to live not far from BVR so used that one a few times. I know it's wishful thinking but I do hope some allowance is made with our expanding population that the track needs may be needed for track again in the future. Admittedly its narrow gauge, but BVR has shown the 2 can work side by side.

 

 

Interesting. The ideas are probably sound, but sadly I fear that the existing heavy rail may not be able to cope with what you are trying to do. For instance King's Lynn Junction and station is now quite restricted, indeed a new carriage siding is in the planning process and that is going to go down alongside the Middleton branch, with a link to the main (so avoiding the switchback into the yard). This may well give you a good link to get onto the Middleton from the station in the future....

Sadly Lynn station is very cramped now. It has, to the laymans eye, four platform faces, nos 1&2 in daily use for punters, platform 3 is a carriage siding, and there is a face opposite 2, which cannot be reused, as even if track was relaid into it, the boundary of the railway is less than 3 feet from the platform face, and therefore unusable.

A major change in stabling would be required to allow 3 to be brought back into use, along with heavy re-laying of the track in the whole station area...

 

If you were going to go ahead with the Lynn- Norwich branch it would probably be worth linking it across to Wisbeach, thereby opening up another corridor for freight to avoid Ely. A triangulaur junction at Lynn Junction would allow freights to avoid the reversal in Lynn yard, and along with re-doubling between Lynn and Maggy Road, this would be a material gain, the single line sections on the Elyy Lynn line being big restrictions to capacity.

 

Andy G

I'm not familiar with Kings Lynn station at all really, I'm just familiar with how horrible the A47 is. That is interesting and useful info about how the station operates, the alterations you mention to get 3 usable platform faces and stabling out onto the Middleton branch would make sense.

 

Aren't there already preservation efforts with the line from March to Wisbeach? Adding additional to stretch it further than Kings Lynn could be interesting to look at, potentially bypassing the existing Kings Lynn station heading towards Wisbeach and Peterborough...

 

 

  

Just found this thread!

 

Several years ago, a report was produced by a Light Rail Transit Association member who lived in the Norwich area into his proposals for a light rail network for the City, using several existing and disused railway alignments. As an LRTA member living in East Anglia, I was sent a copy and I still have it somewhere. Will have to try and find it...........

That would be interesting to see, thank you.

[uax6]

The Bramley Line Assoc hasn't really made much progress over the years and re-opening as a proper railway has been on the cards for some years now and somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to remember that they have lost access to the railway, only having rights to their depot now, but this might be wrong.

 

The obvious route to get to Wisbech from Lynn these days would be to use Lynn Harbour Junction and head out on the M&GN trackbed and cross the Great Ouse, then follow the A47 dual carriageway. A new station is required at Wisbech anyway, and it could be located on the south side of the A47, and have a huge car-park. The new route can then join the existent track and head towards March. If this is the route chosen, then the M&GN Lynn avoiding line could be re-profiled to allow the through route from Middleton to Harbour Junc, with a cord to allow access to the existent Lynn-Ely line (The avoiding line flys over the top of this and the Middleton lines at present), so that freight could avoid Lynn completely.

 

Andy G

Edited January 23, 2019 by uax6

[Johann Marsbar]

 

That would be interesting to see, thank you.

 

I managed to find my copy - though it was produced longer ago than I expected - Spring 1996 to be exact!

 

It's 12 pages long (+covers) so not an enormous document.  Basically the author was suggesting a street running light rail link between Harford P&R and Thorpe station via Hall Rd/Lakenham Rd/Ipswich Rd/ Castle Meadow/Prince of Wales Rd, which would have been connected to the Wymondham and Diss rail lines close to Harford P&R and other rail lines at Thorpe.

 

Basically a tram-train system going out as far as Thetford/East Dereham/Diss/Lowestoft/Yarmouth/Sheringham, linked through the centre of Norwich. Also a Lowestoft-Yarmouth link proposed (mainly "on street") as a future extension.

Edited January 23, 2019 by Johann Marsbar

[Fenman]

 

 

I had briefly seen something about that. I enjoy a good footpath and used to live not far from BVR so used that one a few times. I know it's wishful thinking but I do hope some allowance is made with our expanding population that the track needs may be needed for track again in the future. Admittedly its narrow gauge, but BVR has shown the 2 can work side by side.

...

 

AIUI, most of the former M&GN track bed was sold off to private owners - much of it goes over farms which have gradually increased the size of their fields, leaving the trackbed often running across the middle of a megafield as just an indistinguishable strip of arable land.

 

So this project would require negotiations with all the private landowners to allow public access for the footpath. That's a long way away from getting a railway line reinstated which, frankly, I imagine is financially impossible now for, say, Norwich-Fakenham-Lynn.

 

Paul