Roland Perry wrote:

The through platform at Cambridge needs extending by about half a
carriage (either end) to accommodate 12-car trains in the Thameslink
plan [maybe they were originally designed for a loco +10]. But if they
are thinking of running 12-car trains then presumably these will be made
of 4-cars from Kings Lynn joining the rear of a fresh 8-cars, and the
northern half of the platform will therefore be blocked by this
operation for five minutes. [And the converse in the evening].

How about building another platform, as at Wolverhampton and Rugby, or
is there something sacred about the Cambridge layout?
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632982.html
(43 171 at Stockport, 1985)

In message , at 16:10:03 on
Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Chris Tolley remarked:
The through platform at Cambridge needs extending by about half a
carriage (either end) to accommodate 12-car trains in the Thameslink
plan [maybe they were originally designed for a loco +10]. But if they
are thinking of running 12-car trains then presumably these will be made
of 4-cars from Kings Lynn joining the rear of a fresh 8-cars, and the
northern half of the platform will therefore be blocked by this
operation for five minutes. [And the converse in the evening].

How about building another platform, as at Wolverhampton and Rugby, or
is there something sacred about the Cambridge layout?

There are apparently plans for an island platform, but that may be more
because they want to shift the terminus a couple of miles north to
Chesterton Sidings.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...

How about building another platform, as at Wolverhampton and Rugby, or
is there something sacred about the Cambridge layout?

There are apparently plans for an island platform, but that may be more
because they want to shift the terminus a couple of miles north to
Chesterton Sidings.

Alternatively there are some people who think the island platform scheme is
designed to scupper Chesterton Parkway, as if you get one you won't need the
other. But understanding rail conspiracy theories is beyond me, so please
don't shoot the messenger!

--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Limited - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
16:10:03 on Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Chris Tolley
remarked:
The through platform at Cambridge needs extending by about half a
carriage (either end) to accommodate 12-car trains in the Thameslink
plan [maybe they were originally designed for a loco +10]. But if
they are thinking of running 12-car trains then presumably these
will be made of 4-cars from Kings Lynn joining the rear of a fresh
8-cars, and the northern half of the platform will therefore be
blocked by this operation for five minutes. [And the converse in
the evening].

How about building another platform, as at Wolverhampton and Rugby, or
is there something sacred about the Cambridge layout?

There are apparently plans for an island platform, but that may be
more because they want to shift the terminus a couple of miles
north to Chesterton Sidings.

No, it's because of the plan to run 12 cars on West Anglia. While there
is or soon will be capacity for through 12 car trains (for a minimal
extension of platform 1 and a slightly greater extension of platform 4)
there is just no way of terminating the Liverpool St service, which uses
platforms 2 and 3 pretty well entirely, if it comprises 12 car trains,
without extra platforms.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message . uk, at
20:54:00 on Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
There are apparently plans for an island platform, but that may be
more because they want to shift the terminus a couple of miles
north to Chesterton Sidings.

No, it's because of the plan to run 12 cars on West Anglia. While there
is or soon will be capacity for through 12 car trains (for a minimal
extension of platform 1 and a slightly greater extension of platform 4)
there is just no way of terminating the Liverpool St service, which uses
platforms 2 and 3 pretty well entirely, if it comprises 12 car trains,
without extra platforms.

Why can't they terminate at Chesterton Parkway?
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message . uk,
at 20:54:00 on Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
There are apparently plans for an island platform, but that may be
more because they want to shift the terminus a couple of miles
north to Chesterton Sidings.

No, it's because of the plan to run 12 cars on West Anglia. While
there
is or soon will be capacity for through 12 car trains (for a minimal
extension of platform 1 and a slightly greater extension of platform
4)
there is just no way of terminating the Liverpool St service, which
uses platforms 2 and 3 pretty well entirely, if it comprises 12 car
trains, without extra platforms.

Why can't they terminate at Chesterton Parkway?

Only one terminating platform. I'm not sure it will accommodate 12 car
trains either.

No planning has included 12 car trains on West Anglia until a very recent
plan mainly concerned with issues nearer London but where Cambridge is
the only practical termination point. At least that's my reading of it.
I'm assured that the case for Chesterton Parkway is unaffected, mainly
because CB1 depends on diverting the cars from the existing station.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message . uk, at
21:30:00 on Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Why can't they terminate at Chesterton Parkway?

Only one terminating platform. I'm not sure it will accommodate 12 car
trains either.

No planning has included 12 car trains on West Anglia until a very recent
plan mainly concerned with issues nearer London but where Cambridge is
the only practical termination point. At least that's my reading of it.
I'm assured that the case for Chesterton Parkway is unaffected, mainly
because CB1 depends on diverting the cars from the existing station.

So how will Chesterton Parkway work? Shuttling one unit down to
Cambridge to connect with the remainder... and with only one platform
it'll be challenging to have sufficiently regular trains to attract
commuters in their cars.
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message . uk,
at 21:30:00 on Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Colin Rosenstiel
remarked:
Why can't they terminate at Chesterton Parkway?

Only one terminating platform. I'm not sure it will accommodate 12 car
trains either.

No planning has included 12 car trains on West Anglia until a very
recent plan mainly concerned with issues nearer London but where
Cambridge is the only practical termination point. At least that's
my reading of it. I'm assured that the case for Chesterton Parkway
is unaffected, mainly because CB1 depends on diverting the cars from
the existing station.

So how will Chesterton Parkway work? Shuttling one unit down to
Cambridge to connect with the remainder... and with only one
platform it'll be challenging to have sufficiently regular trains
to attract commuters in their cars.

It will have two through platforms as well as a terminating bay. Some
trains will go through Cambridge to terminate there instead of at
Cambridge. I don;t think they will be 12-car though I don't recall it
being discussed in the Chesterton plans.

--
Colin Rosenstiel