In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 14:34:06 on Tue, 6 Dec
2016, Jim Chisholm remarked:
Chris Grayling says today...
". I will begin by looking at the reopening of the link from Oxford to
Cambridge, to support a range of opportunities including housing,
science, technology and innovation. I am going to establish East West
Rail as a new and separate organisation, to accelerate the permissions
needed to reopen the route, and to secure private sector involvement to
design, build and operate the route as an integrated organisation.

I look forward to the day that Network Rail hand over the Shepreth to
Norwich section of the route to this separate organisation. Maybe
they'll make a better fist of reconfiguring Ely North Junction.

This East West Rail organisation will be established early in the New
Year and chaired by the former Chief Executive of Chiltern Rail, Rob
Brighouse."

Will the current flag-wavers be politely shown the door, or
amalgamated into the new organisation?

[uk.transport.london added as this has come up there too.]

If this wasn't coming from Chris Grayling I wouldn't be so worried. He has a
dismal record of allowing private ownership dogma overriding common sense
and has shown a dire lack of understanding of the realities of transport.

However, I can see the case for a Special Purpose Vehicle when Network Rail
is slipping so far behind in delivering it programme of projects and the
Chilterns link is encouraging.

But the truth is that the record of parties other than Network Rail
delivering rail projects isn't brilliant. They ended up taking over delivery
of Evergreen 3 for Chiltern, of the Borders Railway and of Cambridge North
station (from the County Council). So I'm sceptical how this will end.

Also, integration with the Chiltern franchise to operate the completed
railway will not be helped by separation. It won't just be a
Cambridge-Oxford railway. Think of Marylebone-Aylesbury-Milton Keynes for
example.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

wrote in message
...
In article , (Roland
Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 14:34:06 on Tue, 6 Dec
2016, Jim Chisholm remarked:
Chris Grayling says today...
". I will begin by looking at the reopening of the link from Oxford to
Cambridge, to support a range of opportunities including housing,
science, technology and innovation. I am going to establish East West
Rail as a new and separate organisation, to accelerate the permissions
needed to reopen the route, and to secure private sector involvement to
design, build and operate the route as an integrated organisation.

I look forward to the day that Network Rail hand over the Shepreth to
Norwich section of the route to this separate organisation. Maybe
they'll make a better fist of reconfiguring Ely North Junction.

This East West Rail organisation will be established early in the New
Year and chaired by the former Chief Executive of Chiltern Rail, Rob
Brighouse."

Will the current flag-wavers be politely shown the door, or
amalgamated into the new organisation?

[uk.transport.london added as this has come up there too.]

If this wasn't coming from Chris Grayling I wouldn't be so worried. He has
a
dismal record of allowing private ownership dogma overriding common sense
and has shown a dire lack of understanding of the realities of transport.

However, I can see the case for a Special Purpose Vehicle when Network
Rail
is slipping so far behind in delivering it programme of projects and the
Chilterns link is encouraging.

But the truth is that the record of parties other than Network Rail
delivering rail projects isn't brilliant. They ended up taking over
delivery
of Evergreen 3 for Chiltern, of the Borders Railway and of Cambridge North
station (from the County Council). So I'm sceptical how this will end.

Also, integration with the Chiltern franchise to operate the completed
railway will not be helped by separation. It won't just be a
Cambridge-Oxford railway.

Think of Marylebone-Aylesbury-Milton Keynes for
example.

I was wondering about how that service was supposed to work. I fear that
perhaps the solution is, that it wont

tim

tim... wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article , (Roland
Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 14:34:06 on Tue, 6 Dec
2016, Jim Chisholm remarked:
Chris Grayling says today...
". I will begin by looking at the reopening of the link from Oxford to
Cambridge, to support a range of opportunities including housing,
science, technology and innovation. I am going to establish East West
Rail as a new and separate organisation, to accelerate the permissions
needed to reopen the route, and to secure private sector involvement to
design, build and operate the route as an integrated organisation.

I look forward to the day that Network Rail hand over the Shepreth to
Norwich section of the route to this separate organisation. Maybe
they'll make a better fist of reconfiguring Ely North Junction.

This East West Rail organisation will be established early in the New
Year and chaired by the former Chief Executive of Chiltern Rail, Rob
Brighouse."

Will the current flag-wavers be politely shown the door, or
amalgamated into the new organisation?

[uk.transport.london added as this has come up there too.]

If this wasn't coming from Chris Grayling I wouldn't be so worried. He has
a
dismal record of allowing private ownership dogma overriding common sense
and has shown a dire lack of understanding of the realities of transport.

However, I can see the case for a Special Purpose Vehicle when Network
Rail
is slipping so far behind in delivering it programme of projects and the
Chilterns link is encouraging.

But the truth is that the record of parties other than Network Rail
delivering rail projects isn't brilliant. They ended up taking over
delivery
of Evergreen 3 for Chiltern, of the Borders Railway and of Cambridge North
station (from the County Council). So I'm sceptical how this will end.

Also, integration with the Chiltern franchise to operate the completed
railway will not be helped by separation. It won't just be a
Cambridge-Oxford railway.

Think of Marylebone-Aylesbury-Milton Keynes for
example.

I was wondering about how that service was supposed to work. I fear that
perhaps the solution is, that it wont

Who knows? It's certainly part of the plan, but it'll just be an hourly
extension of the Aylesbury Vale Parkway service. The track north of
Aylesbury will not be doubled.

On Thu, 8 Dec 2016 15:34:50 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

tim... wrote:

wrote in message
...
In article , (Roland
Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 14:34:06 on Tue, 6 Dec
2016, Jim Chisholm remarked:
Chris Grayling says today...
". I will begin by looking at the reopening of the link from Oxford to
Cambridge, to support a range of opportunities including housing,
science, technology and innovation. I am going to establish East West
Rail as a new and separate organisation, to accelerate the permissions
needed to reopen the route, and to secure private sector involvement to
design, build and operate the route as an integrated organisation.

I look forward to the day that Network Rail hand over the Shepreth to
Norwich section of the route to this separate organisation. Maybe
they'll make a better fist of reconfiguring Ely North Junction.

This East West Rail organisation will be established early in the New
Year and chaired by the former Chief Executive of Chiltern Rail, Rob
Brighouse."

Will the current flag-wavers be politely shown the door, or
amalgamated into the new organisation?

[uk.transport.london added as this has come up there too.]

If this wasn't coming from Chris Grayling I wouldn't be so worried. He has
a
dismal record of allowing private ownership dogma overriding common sense
and has shown a dire lack of understanding of the realities of transport.

However, I can see the case for a Special Purpose Vehicle when Network
Rail
is slipping so far behind in delivering it programme of projects and the
Chilterns link is encouraging.

But the truth is that the record of parties other than Network Rail
delivering rail projects isn't brilliant. They ended up taking over
delivery
of Evergreen 3 for Chiltern, of the Borders Railway and of Cambridge North
station (from the County Council). So I'm sceptical how this will end.

Also, integration with the Chiltern franchise to operate the completed
railway will not be helped by separation. It won't just be a
Cambridge-Oxford railway.

Think of Marylebone-Aylesbury-Milton Keynes for
example.

I was wondering about how that service was supposed to work. I fear that
perhaps the solution is, that it wont

Who knows? It's certainly part of the plan, but it'll just be an hourly
extension of the Aylesbury Vale Parkway service. The track north of
Aylesbury will not be doubled.

It has already been done many years ago with Christmas shoppng
specials to MK. Did it twice, I think..

Guy Gorton

On 2016\12\08 15:34, Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:

wrote in message
...

Think of Marylebone-Aylesbury-Milton Keynes for
example.

I was wondering about how that service was supposed to work. I fear that
perhaps the solution is, that it wont

Who knows? It's certainly part of the plan, but it'll just be an hourly
extension of the Aylesbury Vale Parkway service. The track north of
Aylesbury will not be doubled.

I think Milton Keynes - Aylesbury - High Wycombe - Old Oak Common is
more likely.

Basil Jet wrote:
On 2016\12\08 15:34, Recliner wrote:
tim... wrote:

wrote in message
...

Think of Marylebone-Aylesbury-Milton Keynes for
example.

I was wondering about how that service was supposed to work. I fear that
perhaps the solution is, that it wont

Who knows? It's certainly part of the plan, but it'll just be an hourly
extension of the Aylesbury Vale Parkway service. The track north of
Aylesbury will not be doubled.

I think Milton Keynes - Aylesbury - High Wycombe - Old Oak Common is
more likely.

Yes, Chiltern have suggested that, perhaps as an additional service that
won't overload Marylebone.