East West rail, Bletchley to oxford line

[phil-b259]

On 31/05/2023 at 10:14, Davexoc said:

 

Something that should have been done last time they muddled with it when the Barford bypass was done. Stick a new dual carriageway onto a roundabout in the middle of an already busy trunk road and guess what??? Couldn't see that one coming, no forethought. Many years late....

 

The problem here, as it usual in the UK, is the way the UK Treasury rules evaluate plans.

 

To put it simply building a huge new junction on the A1 would have sunk the BCR for what was a fairly bog standard by-pass.

 

Added to that there is a certain paranoia in the Treasury about having things sat around unused for ages or ending up a complete waste of money (as in the never used bridges at Hooley for the M23 continuation into Central London) lest they be a 'drain on the public purse' - so we get the daft situation that when the upgrade to the A1 through North Yorks was canned a decade or so ago Highways England (as it then was) became forced to sell off all the property they had purchased for the scheme - only to have to buy it back a few years later at much higher prices when the motorway upgrade was re-inserted into the roads programme.

 

So to turn back to the 'Black Cat Roundabout', the issue is simply that although when the Great Barford By-pass was being designed it was known there were aspirations for a new high quality dual carriageway over to Cambridge, those aspirations were still just aspirations with no route, no budget and no timescales attached. As a result the teams in charge of designing the by-pass were told to 'do the minimum' at the A1 end - anything else being anathema to HM Treasury.

 

Over in mainland Europe they would probably have not messed round building things piecemeal - and designed the whole M1 J13 (which is also a dogs dinner of a junction) to Cambridge as a single scheme, not a bunch of individual by-passes and the current mess of an A1 junction would not have existed. That however require the population (and politicians) to be les obsessed about 'low taxes' (which is why HM Treasury operates as it does) - Quality infrastructure doesn't come cheap in a developed nation like ours and its about time the UK woke up to that fact!

 

 

 

 

Edited June 18, 2023 by phil-b259

[lmsforever]

Went out to give an RNLI talk last week and found myself next to the line near Winslow and  next to me the line had two tracks laid and ballasted looked good and pleasing .

[rodent279]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

Quality infrastructure doesn't come cheap in a developed nation like ours and its about time the UK woke up to that fact!

I'm not holding my breath.

[chris p bacon]

3 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

The problem here, as it usual in the UK, is the way the UK Treasury rules evaluate plans.

 

To put it simply building a huge new junction on the A1 would have sunk the BCR for what was a fairly bog standard by-pass.

 

Added to that there is a certain paranoia in the Treasury about having things sat around unused for ages or ending up a complete waste of money (as in the never used bridges at Hooley for the M23 continuation into Central London) lest they be a 'drain on the public purse' - so we get the daft situation that when the upgrade to the A1 through North Yorks was canned a decade or so ago Highways England (as it then was) became forced to sell off all the property they had purchased for the scheme - only to have to buy it back a few years later at much higher prices when the motorway upgrade was re-inserted into the roads programme.

 

So to turn back to the 'Black Cat Roundabout', the issue is simply that although when the Great Barford By-pass was being designed it was known there were aspirations for a new high quality dual carriageway over to Cambridge, those aspirations were still just aspirations with no route, no budget and no timescales attached. As a result the teams in charge of designing the by-pass were told to 'do the minimum' at the A1 end - anything else being anathema to HM Treasury.

 

Over in mainland Europe they would probably have not messed round building things piecemeal - and designed the whole M1 J13 (which is also a dogs dinner of a junction) to Cambridge as a single scheme, not a bunch of individual by-passes and the current mess of an A1 junction would not have existed. That however require the population (and politicians) to be les obsessed about 'low taxes' (which is why HM Treasury operates as it does) - Quality infrastructure doesn't come cheap in a developed nation like ours and its about time the UK woke up to that fact!

 

 

 

 

 

Having lived in Sandy for 50+ years until 18 months ago, the problem with Black cat is that so many just don't understand the much bigger picture surrounding the A1.

For all the talk about a better A1/A428 junction and how the Government wouldn't spend money, the point is missed that the A1 at this point is a dual carriageway along the route of the Great North Road rather than a motorway standard multi lane road. The approach from the South includes 2 ninety degree bends across the Ouse where there have been many more accidents than on the roundabout itself.  (most are cars and lorries not making the second bend even though it is a 50mph limit)

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.179445,-0.3011399,1344m/data=!3m1!1e3?entry=ttu

 

Black cat is just one of 5 roundabouts (Buckden, Black Cat, Sandy, Biggleswade North & South) Between Berwick upon Tweed and Stirling Corner and the Sandy and Biggleswade roundabouts suffer from much worse traffic congestion than Black cat. 

 

The A1 in Bedfordshire requires moving a substantial distance to overcome the many obstacles that limit its development, but the cost some 25-30 years ago was costed at 2+ Billion and faced a lot of opposition.  

[Nearholmer]

Yep, the A1 in Beds is an awful road, both to drive on and to be near, specifically because it isn’t a motorway.

There are so many crossings of it on the flat, and it creates a horrible great barrier and blight strip. The M1 is less intrusive, because all the smaller roads go over or under it, and it doesn’t create a barrier; except perhaps in terms of noise, IMO it’s a less intrusive road to be near.

[Andy Kirkham]

On 17/06/2023 at 09:40, Ryde-on-time said:

At least reopening of the Bedford Bletchley line is getting closer with the replacement class 150s getting sorted

 

https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2023/06/livery-unveiled-for-bedford-bletchley-replacement-trains.html?fbclid=IwAR1Eob6j01gIiH-_dLQ2HJp5Xpoy3R0dQpSpQe783ZhB90IYoFXcwWhNJmc_aem_th_AWDf-YLQTMrGg_U0lCxk7jBZPBNYmpzK2zF3Kqw-phT5p3o9xWOegVKMZegf2ukY-po

That livery reminds me of dazzle camouflage.

[KingEdwardII]

1 hour ago, chris p bacon said:

For all the talk about a better A1/A428

Major dual carriageway roads like the A1 should not have any roundabouts on them. Period.

 

Roundabouts are the worst kind of junction for major roads of this kind. It is a British disease that we continue to use them despite all the evidence that they are a very bad idea. Proper graded junctions are required.

 

Two roundabout arrangements that really annoy me are on the A2 where it crosses the M2 west of Canterbury, and the junction of the A34 with the M3 on the north side of Winchester. Huge jams are the norm in both cases - all caused by badly designed junctions. There are many similar examples all over the country.

 

Yours, Mike.

[cctransuk]

12 hours ago, KingEdwardII said:

Major dual carriageway roads like the A1 should not have any roundabouts on them. Period.

 

Roundabouts are the worst kind of junction for major roads of this kind. It is a British disease that we continue to use them despite all the evidence that they are a very bad idea. Proper graded junctions are required.

 

Two roundabout arrangements that really annoy me are on the A2 where it crosses the M2 west of Canterbury, and the junction of the A34 with the M3 on the north side of Winchester. Huge jams are the norm in both cases - all caused by badly designed junctions. There are many similar examples all over the country.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

Surely it's a case of old roundabout junctions being designed for a certain volume of traffic - and now failing to handle multiples of that volume, many years after their sell-by date?

 

The design was perfectly adequate at the time that they were built.

 

CJI (who knows a little about highway design, after forty years in the business).

[KingEdwardII]

2 hours ago, cctransuk said:

The design was perfectly adequate at the time that they were built.

No, that isn't true, not of junctions between major roads. The M3 / A34 junction was broken as designed and has been a misery since it was opened. The same was true of the A34 / M4 junction, but eventually the moaning got so loud that they rebuilt the junction - cost a lot to do, but the new layout works without huge queues.

 

Your point about roundabouts being designed for a certain volume of traffic is correct, but the problem is that the volume is always exceeded when you deal with major roads.

 

Yours, Mike.

[cctransuk]

27 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

No, that isn't true, not of junctions between major roads. The M3 / A34 junction was broken as designed and has been a misery since it was opened. The same was true of the A34 / M4 junction, but eventually the moaning got so loud that they rebuilt the junction - cost a lot to do, but the new layout works without huge queues.

 

Your point about roundabouts being designed for a certain volume of traffic is correct, but the problem is that the volume is always exceeded when you deal with major roads.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

Not knowing the specifics of the junctions to which you refer, it would be foolish of me to speculate.

 

I also wonder if you have access to the data and traffic forecasts that was current at the time that the junctions in question were designed? Without such data, it is impossible for you, or me, to pass an opinion as to whether the designs were 'bad'.

 

Contrary to popular belief, highway design engineers do NOT have, as their primary objective, the creation of traffic queues! Taking the design brief, they use the latest design research and produce a scheme which will fulfil the design brief.

 

Whether that design is deemed to be too expensive, and the optimum scheme must be 'adjusted', is not the decision of professional engineers, but politicians.

 

So if you perceive a design to be 'bad', the chances are that it could have been better, and was 'tweaked' on the instructions of politicians.

 

CJI.

Edited June 19, 2023 by cctransuk

[cctransuk]

57 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

No, that isn't true, not of junctions between major roads. The M3 / A34 junction was broken as designed and has been a misery since it was opened. The same was true of the A34 / M4 junction, but eventually the moaning got so loud that they rebuilt the junction - cost a lot to do, but the new layout works without huge queues.

 

Your point about roundabouts being designed for a certain volume of traffic is correct, but the problem is that the volume is always exceeded when you deal with major roads.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

What you are saying is that all major road junctions should be grade-separated; I doubt that there is a highway design engineer that would disagree.

 

Now, perhaps you could reassure us that taxpayers would be universally pleased to pay the level of taxes required in order to fund such a road-building spree?

 

I can assure you that all highway design engineers would jump at the chance of such a bonanza!

 

CJI.

Edited June 19, 2023 by cctransuk

[melmerby]

15 hours ago, Andy Kirkham said:

That livery reminds me of dazzle camouflage.

Not much different to other LNWR trains:

 

[The Stationmaster]

Grade separated junctions - be they fio railways or roads - use far more land than flat junctions and cost a lot more to build.  Anyone who remembers Retford before the flat crossing was grade separated will know that.

 

Incidentally as far the M4/A34 junction is concerned it was more than adequate at the time it was buit, even when the nearby show ground accessed frm the A34 was in use for a major event.  It took quite a long while - measured probably more in decades rather than years - to become what it eventually became before rebuilding.  And in that respect it was no different at all from the A4/M4 junction just west of Reading (which I drove over every week or so for many years) or the A33/M4 junction south of Reading.  Traffic growth simply overwhelmed the original junction layout at both of those junctions but it was no doubt well into their designed lives before that happened and before it became a serious problem.

[Talltim]

1 hour ago, The Stationmaster said:

Grade separated junctions - be they fio railways or roads - use far more land than flat junctions and cost a lot more to build.  Anyone who remembers Retford before the flat crossing was grade separated will know that.

 

Incidentally as far the M4/A34 junction is concerned it was more than adequate at the time it was buit, even when the nearby show ground accessed frm the A34 was in use for a major event.  It took quite a long while - measured probably more in decades rather than years - to become what it eventually became before rebuilding.  And in that respect it was no different at all from the A4/M4 junction just west of Reading (which I drove over every week or so for many years) or the A33/M4 junction south of Reading.  Traffic growth simply overwhelmed the original junction layout at both of those junctions but it was no doubt well into their designed lives before that happened and before it became a serious problem.

Surel they should get upgraded/rebuilt before they become overwhelmed?

[MidlandRed]

50 minutes ago, Talltim said:

Surel they should get upgraded/rebuilt before they become overwhelmed?

It is far more complex than that in reality. By their very nature road improvements occur in sections, each one designed to deal with predicted traffic up to a set design year and accounting for all known traffic growth including that through ‘committed’ development at the time of justification. That prediction in itself can be something of a dark art and as with everything else, can be affected by unknown factors (Covid being a recent one). Although off topic, A34/M3 is an interesting case, that has been affected by various factors - until 1985 or so, the M3 wasn’t continuous from the north end of Winchester bypass (A34) to the junction of M3/A33/A303 so effectively the ‘Y’ junction was A33/A34 at Kings Worthy. From 1985, missing link of M3 was completed and terminated at Winnall where it joined the A34 (A33 being bypassed and becoming a ‘local’ road. Subsequently the A34 was improved as the extension of the M3 between Winnall and the M27 at Southampton - remember the Twyford Down protests? That left J9 as a grade separated junction between A34 and M3, the latter having priority as a motorway. The A34 now has a greater traffic flow and high HGV content so a grade separated scheme was prepared to deal with the current congestion and safety problems at the A34 roundabout. It should be noted there are significant environmental constraints north of the junction on A34 owing to the River Itchen whilst the outskirts of Winchester straddle the M3. The scheme tied into a Smart motorway scheme to deal with congestion between the A34 and M27 - both schemes have been subject to funding and other Policy issues - but the M3 J9 improvement was in the Roads Investment Strategy Programme and ready to go through Statutory process. 
 

A1 Black Cat Roundabout is inextricably linked to the A428 Black Cat to Caxton Gibbett roundabout scheme - this high standard dual carriageway scheme which is in the Roads Investment Strategy programme bypasses the existing single carriageway length of A428 which itself is an earlier bypass of St Neots. It requires grade separation at both Black Cat and Caxton Gibbett roundabouts by nature of modern standards and its design brief and links the existing dual carriageways to the west and east, and would reduce existing safety and congestion problems throughout. That scheme is separate to,

but would form part of a wider Oxford to Cambridge road strategy which is/was at a much earlier preparation stage. I’ve spent several years of my working life on those schemes!! There are lots of challenges to meet!! 

[Northmoor]

2 hours ago, Talltim said:

Surel they should get upgraded/rebuilt before they become overwhelmed?

I'm sure the DfT would be happy to fund a road scheme capable of handling four times current traffic levels.  They've a long history of approving rail infrastructure improvements to allow for growth, haven't they?

Sarcasm mode off; there are exceptions - the Jubilee Line Extension, Northern Line Extension and Crossrail have all been designed with room for expansion, although the JLE has arguably now filled the spare capacity.

[KingEdwardII]

5 hours ago, cctransuk said:

was 'tweaked' on the instructions of politicians.

I can well believe that.

 

I don't know who was really responsible for the designs, but in some of these cases it would have been easy to predict the problems given the nature of the roads being joined.

 

The A34 is the major trunk route connecting Midlands/North to the South Coast - it has a lot of freight traffic going to/from Southampton Docks, for example, as well as lots of people journeying between the major population centres. So, yes, it is a busy route. M3 is equally busy.

 

I suppose we're discussing the equivalent of major junctions on the railways - where (e.g.) flyovers become necessary to avoid conflicting movements snarling things up when there are many movements per hour.

 

Yours, Mike.

[KingEdwardII]

5 hours ago, cctransuk said:

taxpayers would be universally pleased to pay the level of taxes required

I think that most road users would rightly argue that they pay more than enough taxes - it's just that the politicians love to spend the money on 101 other things.

 

Yours, Mike.

[cctransuk]

3 hours ago, Talltim said:

Surel they should get upgraded/rebuilt before they become overwhelmed?

 

'Should' rarely means much when it comes to financing these things.

 

CJI.

[Northmoor]

1 hour ago, KingEdwardII said:

I can well believe that.

 

I don't know who was really responsible for the designs, but in some of these cases it would have been easy to predict the problems given the nature of the roads being joined.

 

The A34 is the major trunk route connecting Midlands/North to the South Coast - it has a lot of freight traffic going to/from Southampton Docks, for example, as well as lots of people journeying between the major population centres. So, yes, it is a busy route. M3 is equally busy.

 

I suppose we're discussing the equivalent of major junctions on the railways - where (e.g.) flyovers become necessary to avoid conflicting movements snarling things up when there are many movements per hour.

 

Yours, Mike.

There is a great similarity between the A14 A1-M1 link, which like the A34 was built as a two-lane dual-carriageway (and about 20 years after it was clearly needed).  They both share the common feature of not going to/from London, which seems to be an important criteria when major roads are specified.

[cctransuk]

53 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

There is a great similarity between the A14 A1-M1 link, which like the A34 was built as a two-lane dual-carriageway (and about 20 years after it was clearly needed).  They both share the common feature of not going to/from London, which seems to be an important criteria when major roads are specified.

 

I used the M1 to M11 section of the A14 recently, and was astounded at the level of traffic occupying all 3 and 4 lanes of the recently completed A1 - M11 part; which is, for most of the route, an entirely new build on a new alignment.

 

CJI.

Edited June 19, 2023 by cctransuk

[melmerby]

49 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

There is a great similarity between the A14 A1-M1 link, which like the A34 was built as a two-lane dual-carriageway (and about 20 years after it was clearly needed).  They both share the common feature of not going to/from London, which seems to be an important criteria when major roads are specified.

I can remember when it was cobbled together from the A 604 & A45, both of which were busy single carriageway roads.

 

[corneliuslundie]

Do the politicians accept what has been shown to be a fact, namely that any new road scheme generates new traffic which soon  fills or over fills it?

Jonathan

[cctransuk]

1 minute ago, melmerby said:

I can remember when it was cobbled together from the A 604 & A45, both of which were busy single carriageway roads.

 

 

Me too - including watching the earthmoving on the Cambridge bypass section; audible from our then-home.

 

CJI.

[Nearholmer]

By the time you blokes have finished designing road improvements, there’ll be no money left to reopen railways, or for anything else come to that.