Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#22
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 12 Jul 2014 12:23:34 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote: On 2014\07\12 12:18, wrote: Does Southend Airport station have a bay platform? I thought it was just platforms constructed alongside existing tracks, with no track alterations required? You are right. Which should be the cheapest option, though I assume there would still need to be signalling work. |
#23
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#25
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 11:51:56 on
Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Mark Bestley remarked: Corby cost £8.3m One platform on a single line, and famously at the time they didn't do hardly anything to the signalling of what was a lightly used freight-only line, resulting in all sorts of operational headaches. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corby_railway_station#Design_and_construction although wiki implies there was road and car park building as well It does have a car park (60 spaces), but it's all pretty close to the existing road, and the station building is quite modest. -- Roland Perry |
#26
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 11:40:56 on
Sat, 12 Jul 2014, Recliner remarked: East Midlands Airport station cost £25m and Cambridge Northstowe Parkway (officially called "Science Park") is going to cost £26m. Common features are that each have one platform plus one island, large car parks and new access roads, and are built on out-of-town brown field sites. The costs are therefore consistent with Southend Airport. Presumably they needed new track work to accommodate three platform faces? In both cases the track was there before - the two fast and two slow lines through EMD (I misremembered - there's actually three platforms although one is much shorter), and the two fast and one siding/loop at Science Park. But a certain amount of re-positioning to fit the island platform is no doubt required in both cases. Yes, the track would have to be slewed for sure to fit the island platform in. Were new points and crossovers needed as well? Not as far as I know. -- Roland Perry |
#27
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#28
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() The Lea Bridge station is a reopening, using the existing platforms. A better comparison might be the all-new station at Southend Airport, which cost £16m in 2011. Allowing for inflation, the new stations for 8-car trains might cost £20m apiece, plus a few million each to upgrade two existing stations, so the stations probably account for ~£50m. They are very expensive platforms then. |
#29
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#30
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , at 11:33:32
on Mon, 14 Jul 2014, David Cantrell remarked: A certain amount of the track work and signalling already exists for Cambridge Science Park's bay platform, perhaps surprisingly. They are left overs of the former St Ives branch, including what will become the starting signal(!). I would be shocked if any of it was still usable barring the odd bit of conduit here and there. The last train ran over 20 years ago according to t'interweb. You are probably looking at the records for the line to St Ives. The new station is being built on the old Chesterton Sidings, which continues to have aggregates traffic to the Lafarges site. -- Roland Perry |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Croxley Rail Link - Position Update October 2007 | London Transport | |||
Croxley Rail Link Petition | London Transport | |||
CROXLEY RAIL LINK - POSITION UPDATE - February 2007 | London Transport | |||
Future is bleak for Croxley Rail Link | London Transport | |||
No funding for Croxley link | London Transport |