In message , at 11:32:16 on Thu, 15 Dec
2016, tim... remarked:

Why then did you bring up the topic? "it is ... on a closed track bed".

because I missed out, "presumably..."

Do you never make mistakes?

The mistake of claiming I'd brought up the subject (of closed track
beds) is a bit fundamental.

I thought we were discussing east of Bedford.

I am explaining my terminology: Eastern section and Western section

It would be more helpful if you used the same terms as everyone else,
especially Network Rail.

and how am I supposed to know what these terms are?

do you really expect me to go an plough through a pile of someone
else's documents just to make a small point?

It's not a small point. It's on the front page of the East-West Rail
website, and has featured in numerous news articles this year when the
preferred *central* corridor was announced.

As well as myself reminding you at least twice, earlier in the thread.

The Western section is the part West of Bletchley that is an in situ
freight line and the Eastern Section is the part East of Bedford that
is currently open fields (or whatever). You can put the bit in the
middle in whichever section you like.

It just happens that this terminology also fits in with the likely
service pattern which will see many trains running to (and probably
terminating at} MK just off somewhere about the mid point of the route.

The service pattern used for the latest (2016) study is:

1 train per hour (tph) London Paddington - Oxford - Cambridge semi-fast

1 tph Bletchley - Cambridge semi-fast; and

1 tph Bristol - Cambridge, with alternate trains extended to Norwich
or Ipswich.

Plus optionally 1 tph Bournemouth - Manchester (currently
-Oxford-Banbury) diverted via Bletchley, Bicester and WCML.

and what about the Oxford to Marylebone and the long proposed Aylesbury
to MK services, that will also use the line?

None of those use the line from Bedford to Cambridge (which is the one
whose business case is currently being examined by TPTB).
--
Roland Perry