HS2 under review

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, locoholic said:

High speed does NOT equal high capacity. There's the small problem that stopping distances increase almost exponentially as speed increases, so headways increase. It's the same principal behind Smart Motorways that limit speed, instead of telling drivers to speed up because the road is full.. Yet again you seem to think that trains are exempt from the laws of physics. And the "marginal" extra costs are highly suspect.

 

I have never said that there is no need for a new railway line to be built. I just think that the design of HS2 is wrong, and it should be part of the classic rail network. The current trend for trains to be restricted to one route is producing a network that has no resiliance and where nearly-new trains are sent to the scrapheap when other lines are desperately short of rolling stock.

 

The almost total lack of criticism of HS2 on this forum, and the personal attacks on those that do put their head above the parapet says far more about the mentality of the average rail enthusiast than it does about the merits of HS2.

 

 

How come high speed does not equal high capacity?  I don't think you ought to tell SNCF that because it could get awfully complicated on some of the LGVs if they have to start reducing the number of trains.  According to a specification paper published in 2011 HS2 would have a theoretical plain line headway of 116 seconds at a line speed of 360kph giving a theoretical capacity of 31 (standard) paths per hour and an operational capacity of 23 (standard) paths per hour.  Now that headway capacity is considerably better than the 3 minute headway at 125mph on parts of, for example, the GWML but of course at present the GWML uses conventional lineside signalling.

 

Headway is a complex calculation in its most technical form but in its simplest form, as I used to teach to trainee signalling engineers, it is a combination of speed, braking capacity, signal spacing, and gradients.  Generally as speed increases (or in recent history has increased in Britain) braking has been improved to achieve similar stopping distances from a higher speed.  As a result wholesale resignalling was not needed to cater for the 25% increase in maximum speed when we moved from loco hauled trains to HSTs because the stopping distance of the new trains was little or no greater than that of their predecessors.  

 

The other big factor in headway calculation is in respect of train type and length - a 2100ft long container train is going to have a totally different effect on headway calculations from an 80 metre long EMU (sorry but in the real world they mix the measurements so I have too) and that's before we consider relative speeds and acceleartion characteristics of the two types of train.  In fact the biggest consumer of line capacity is speed differentials between different types of trains and the more complex the mix the more capacity is consumed and efficiency eroded.  Thus for example adding the more frequent stopping train service ambitions of Crossrail to the GWML Relief Lines will unduly consume line capacity reducing its availability for freights and those passenger services which make fewer station stops.  

 

HS2 will not suffer from that problem because all trains will have a similar performance in terms of acceleration, maximum speed, and braking distance hence the operational capacity can be exploited to its maximum (and possibly beyond if reliability is consistently achieved?).   By building a wholly separate route for HS2 it will not be bound by any of the constraints of an adjacent line - for example there is no need to worry about the aerodynamic effect on freight trains on adjacent lines or when passing close to stations or any other trains let alone the impact of engineering work on an adjacent line.  It is another, but rarely voiced (if at all) advantage of building a dedicated route for a certain type of train with a consistent performance.

 

Equally with decent design of the trains there is no need to be slavishly addicted to the sort of gradients that were needed by a steam worked railway because provide the time cost is acceptable much steeper gradients - as on the SNCF LGVs - can be used in everyday operation.

 

 

[Mike Storey]

31 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

How come high speed does not equal high capacity?  I don't think you ought to tell SNCF that because it could get awfully complicated on some of the LGVs if they have to start reducing the number of trains.  According to a specification paper published in 2011 HS2 would have a theoretical plain line headway of 116 seconds at a line speed of 360kph giving a theoretical capacity of 31 (standard) paths per hour and an operational capacity of 23 (standard) paths per hour.  Now that headway capacity is considerably better than the 3 minute headway at 125mph on parts of, for example, the GWML but of course at present the GWML uses conventional lineside signalling.

 

Headway is a complex calculation in its most technical form but in its simplest form, as I used to teach to trainee signalling engineers, it is a combination of speed, braking capacity, signal spacing, and gradients.  Generally as speed increases (or in recent history has increased in Britain) braking has been improved to achieve similar stopping distances from a higher speed.  As a result wholesale resignalling was not needed to cater for the 25% increase in maximum speed when we moved from loco hauled trains to HSTs because the stopping distance of the new trains was little or no greater than that of their predecessors.  

 

The other big factor in headway calculation is in respect of train type and length - a 2100ft long container train is going to have a totally different effect on headway calculations from an 80 metre long EMU (sorry but in the real world they mix the measurements so I have too) and that's before we consider relative speeds and acceleartion characteristics of the two types of train.  In fact the biggest consumer of line capacity is speed differentials between different types of trains and the more complex the mix the more capacity is consumed and efficiency eroded.  Thus for example adding the more frequent stopping train service ambitions of Crossrail to the GWML Relief Lines will unduly consume line capacity reducing its availability for freights and those passenger services which make fewer station stops.  

 

HS2 will not suffer from that problem because all trains will have a similar performance in terms of acceleration, maximum speed, and braking distance hence the operational capacity can be exploited to its maximum (and possibly beyond if reliability is consistently achieved?).   By building a wholly separate route for HS2 it will not be bound by any of the constraints of an adjacent line - for example there is no need to worry about the aerodynamic effect on freight trains on adjacent lines or when passing close to stations or any other trains let alone the impact of engineering work on an adjacent line.  It is another, but rarely voiced (if at all) advantage of building a dedicated route for a certain type of train with a consistent performance.

 

Equally with decent design of the trains there is no need to be slavishly addicted to the sort of gradients that were needed by a steam worked railway because provide the time cost is acceptable much steeper gradients - as on the SNCF LGVs - can be used in everyday operation.

 

 

 

I hope you are not wasting your breath (or rather fingers). It is obvious to any railway person, but apparently not to people who claim to know better about "fizzicks" and stuff.

 

[lmsforever]

How come you have not sold your house Black and Decker Boy and when you try and sell it no one will buy it. 

[phil-b259]

2 hours ago, locoholic said:

 

I have never said that there is no need for a new railway line to be built. I just think that the design of HS2 is wrong, and it should be part of the classic rail network. The current trend for trains to be restricted to one route is producing a network that has no resiliance and where nearly-new trains are sent to the scrapheap when other lines are desperately short of rolling stock.

 

 

Its helpful that you admit a new railway is required - far too many critics (both on here and in the wider world refuse to accept this basic truth*), which in turn makes it hard to take their criticisms seriously.

 

It should be noted though that even if HS2 was built as a 'conventional' railway it would still end up going through the Chilterns, have extensive (and costly) tunnelled sections and very few stations - as such the gains bought by such an idea are not going to be as great as it might initially appear.

 

As for stock new stock going to the scrapheap - that has NOTHING TO DO WITH HS2! - I and many others are not impressed by the DfTs latest wheeze of encouraging total fleet renewal in franchise bids for mainly PR reasons which is what has bought about the process. Like many things the DfT has done in the past decade it is in fact a symptom of the 'short termist' thinking (bribe potential voters with shiny new trains but do nothing about investing in the infrastructure) and must not be confused with sensible long term planning.

 

 

 

* Which is that to cater for the demand for increased railway capacity on the WCML over the next 2 decades the equivalent of a brand new two track railway is required all the way from Central London to the North West of England. Not doing so will harm the economy, futher increase road traffic and make life more miserable for persons who depend on the current WCML or motorway network to fulfil their needs.

[lmsforever]

20 hours ago, Mike Storey said:

 

Absolute codswallop. Italy has a population similar to the UK (61m v 65m) and a land area roughly similar to the UK (301 km2 v 243 km2), and a division economically and culturally between north and south (except it is the opposite polarities that are in contest, than the UK).  So what are you talking about???

 

Yet again, you are just making it up.

 

 I am not making it up Italy has more space for new roads and railways  than the UK,  have you not heard of free speech I don't like this project but if you supporters had your way we would be barred from this thread.I will keep on picking up bad practice and bullying by the company.I suggest you have a look at whats been going on at Calvert the people there were being pushed aside but they fought back and made HS2 stop doing the desecration.Wild life is important in the UK and the contractors have been taking liberties and have been stopped.     I saw in the local paper that the bridge over the A413 outside of Wendover will stop the road being widened when asked about this the council were told that's it cant be changed.So keep expecting me to have my say   I DONT MAKE UP NOTIFICATIONS

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

How come you have not sold your house Black and Decker Boy and when you try and sell it no one will buy it. 

 

Presumably because people are being put off with the scare stories circulated by the media (and your good self on occasion) about how its all going to be terrible.

 

It has been explained to you many times that throughout Kent there were very vocal protests against HS1 for EXACTLY the same reasons you cite - construction noise, visual impact of the finished line, wildlife destroyed, folk unable to sell their houses, compensation nowhere near high enough, etc.

 

However, a decade after opening when those same protesting residents were asked about the ACTUAL situation in the post HS1 world, they have been forced to concede that they were talking absolute nonsense and that far from harming the glorious Kent countryside or their own personal situation HS1 has been either neutral or a plus.

 

I have no reason to believe the same will not be true and in a decades time lots of critics will end up looking equally foolish. Yes mistakes will occasionally be made in building HS2 - its bound to happen with a project that big and i have no doubt HS1 had its fair share of problems - but that doesn't change the fact that for the majority of folk HS2 will not cause significant short or long term problems.

 

 

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by phil-b259

[Bernard Lamb]

3 hours ago, woodenhead said:

I think most on this forum are more interested with the fact a new line is being built, the speed doesn't matter that much.

 

New line = new capacity along a new path with less impact

 

Upgrade existing line = hell for the users, the train companies and those who live along the route.

 

A new line is disruptive but not as disruptive as widening an existing line all the way up.

As all those people who used the WCML found out to their cost when Virgin and the Pendolinos came on the scene with seemingly endless disruption.

More congestion and changes to the road network near the existing stations and the lack of available spare coaches, would probably make a major upgrade almost an impossibility these days.

Bernard

[Phil Parker]

19 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

 I am not making it up Italy has more space for new roads and railways  than the UK,  have you not heard of free speech I don't like this project but if you supporters had your way we would be barred from this thread.

 

Interesting accusation. Has anyone tried to ban someone who doesn't like HS2 from this thread? No.

 

Free speech works in both directions. Both sides of a discussion are allowed it. 

[locoholic]

1 hour ago, Mike Storey said:

 

I hope you are not wasting your breath (or rather fingers). It is obvious to any railway person, but apparently not to people who claim to know better about "fizzicks" and stuff.

 

And there's another patronising, arrogant personal comment! Obviously simply being a "railway person" means that you are superior!

 

 

[phil-b259]

2 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

 I am not making it up Italy has more space for new roads and railways  than the UK,  have you not heard of free speech I don't like this project but if you supporters had your way we would be barred from this thread.I will keep on picking up bad practice and bullying by the company.I suggest you have a look at whats been going on at Calvert the people there were being pushed aside but they fought back and made HS2 stop doing the desecration.Wild life is important in the UK and the contractors have been taking liberties and have been stopped.     I saw in the local paper that the bridge over the A413 outside of Wendover will stop the road being widened when asked about this the council were told that's it cant be changed.So keep expecting me to have my say   I DONT MAKE UP NOTIFICATIONS

 

It would be very poor form to tell you to not highlight practices that go contrary to environmental rules or indeed break the promises made by HS2 as regards their contractors behaviour / actions. Any such transgressions should be fully documented and passed on to HS2 / the Environment Agency / etc for them to action.

 

However as I highlighted big housebuilders have been doing much the same sort of things you are getting outraged about at Calvert all over the country. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/03/chris-packham-accuses-property-developer-setting-wildlife-traps/

 

I don't see you calling for Taylor Wimpey to be banned from building houses for killing Hedgehogs by covering hundreds of meters of Hedgerows with netting not many miles away from Calvert (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-47473032)  - which is a classic NIMBY approach (ignore adverse practices elsewhere because they don't fit your agenda).

 

If something is damaging to wildlife / the environment then it needs to be raised on that basis - not as part of a vendetta against something you dislike. In the BBC article the complaint is not about the development - its about the effects of the measures taken on wildlife. Similarly if contractors on HS2 are not behaving* as they should then the contractors need to be fined / replaced.

 

Public pressure has resulted in lots of harmful netting taken down https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/apr/05/use-of-netting-to-stop-birds-nesting-before-housebuilding-rebuked yet the developments themselves are still allowed to happen. This shows that it is not necessary to abandon schemes completely to get improvements to happen - its all about making sure those carrying them out behave responsibly

 

* Network Rail have had complaints before by contractors working on big urban problems misbehaving in the past - bad language and sexual harassment (i.e wolf whistles at passing females) being a problem on certain schemes. Does that mean itself NR should be disbanded or the improvement project abandoned? - or does it actually only mean the contractors need to be sorted out / replaced by ones that will behave properly.

 

 

 

 

[melmerby]

39 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

 I am not making it up Italy has more space for new roads and railways  than the UK,

If it's true provide some evidence, don't just keep stating it hoping everyone will believe you.

 

[The Stationmaster]

27 minutes ago, locoholic said:

And there's another patronising, arrogant personal comment! Obviously simply being a "railway person" means that you are superior!

 

 

Perhaps it means that those of us who have done these things for a living (and in my case have also lectured on the subject as one of the course tutors on the old BR Train planning training courses) actually have some understanding of it?  As I said it is a complex subject involving a number of different elements some of which might not at first be immediately obvious to those (including those working within the railway industry who have never had anything to do with it during their careers).

[black and decker boy]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

How come you have not sold your house Black and Decker Boy and when you try and sell it no one will buy it. 

Why would I need to sell my house. I live near a main road. It’s busy at certain times with and without HS2. Show me a main road that isn’t.

 

the only reason my house wouldn’t currently sell is the 220 new houses being built in my village, which prior to them starting had less than 400houses. Soon will come the 2500 extra houses to Risborough which will take 10 years to build ( so 5 years longer than HS2) and could depress house prices and sales interest in the surrounding villages

 

those 220 new houses will generate over 800 vehicle trips per day. HS2, if every HGV did pass my house would generate 140 trips per day.

 

just sayin like....

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, locoholic said:

And there's another patronising, arrogant personal comment! Obviously simply being a "railway person" means that you are superior!

 

 

 

Quite so.

 

Those of us why do have inner knowledge of railway engineering / projects / operation by virtue of our careers must be careful not to inadvertently belittle those who lack such insights.

 

I admit it can be hard when folk keep slinging discredited or inaccurate media reports at the topic, or where they seem to be motived by personal anger rather than coming up with rational observations* - however try we must, if for no other reason than to try and keep RMWeb in general a pleasant place to be a member of.

 

That said what folk on both sides of the coin need to appreciate is that the arguments around HS2 need to be rooted in FACT - not personal opinion if you are to have any chance of credibility with the opposite side.  HS2 is an infrastructure project - not a beauty pageant nor a religion! Belief has no place in determining the projects worth - that has to come from deep study of all the economic, social, environmental aspects and how they will develop over the coming 50 years or more.

 

Its a FACT that we either need to radically reduce the need for travel (and do so quickly) or dramatically increase rail capacity along the WCML corridor to cope.

Its a FACT that minor tinkering with the current WCML (or indeed Chiltern line to Birmingham) is not enough to provide said increase in rail capacity.

Its a FACT that given the development around our current railways the best corridor to take out of London is through the Chilterns towards Birmingham.

 

About the ONLY thing which can logically be disputed about HS2 therefore is its design specification, its behaviour as an organisation and how it responds to complaints .

 

However failures of contractors who not act in accordance with the standards HS2 require do immediately mean HS2 itself is flawed, nor do they automatically indicate the existence of an evil empire determined to crush the will of everything in pursuit of its objective. Yes as time goes on patterns may emerge and action will have to be taken - but a few isolated incidents at the outset do not automatically mean they are intentional or become the norm.

 

 

 

* A rational observation would be like the one made by the person who noted that under the Smart Motorway programme speeds are actually being reduced to increase capacity at busy times. It is thus quite reasonable for persons lacking the Stationmasters background to argue this effect can be replicated on the railway.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by phil-b259

[black and decker boy]

4 hours ago, locoholic said:

. The current trend for trains to be restricted to one route is producing a network that has no resiliance and where nearly-new trains are sent to the scrapheap when other lines are desperately short of rolling stock.

 

So what nearly new trains have gone to scrapyards? Please provide photos.

 

i need to send to my MP and the Daily Mail as it seems the whole world has missed that one

[black and decker boy]

To clarify the netting of hedges etc.

 

its not illegal

 

removing hedges isn’t illegal

 

there are processes to follow, legal permits to obtain but only if your ecologist finds a protected species. If not, then you can crack on.

 

My client used netting at work on a new road scheme. It wasn’t the preferred option but process was followed. A month or so later, we dug the hedges out. For the loss of 200m of hedge, the client will plant over 1000m of new hedge.

[Mike Storey]

44 minutes ago, locoholic said:

And there's another patronising, arrogant personal comment! Obviously simply being a "railway person" means that you are superior!

 

 

 

Having spent the best part of 40 years, along with others on here, trying to make railways work, trying to get enhancements agreed and then built and trying to understand the best ways of doing it all, through practical application, academic study of theory and study of the ways other countries do it, and by working with independent professionals, I do not claim any superiority, other than that my (our, in other cases on here) knowledge and experience is superior to a non-railway person. So don't put assertions into my mouth, thank you very much.

 

 I know experts have suddenly become unfashionable in the tweeter world, where having any opinion makes everyone an expert. It will not wash on here.

 

Having an opinion is absolutely fine, but it does not mean it cannot be challenged, as I accept you, and others will continue to challenge our views.

 

[phil-b259]

13 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

So what nearly new trains have gone to scrapyards?

 

None have done so yet (though much will depend on what you mean by nearly new) - but its a theoretical possibility what with the entire Grater Anglia DMU fleet being replaced. Similarly the 455s with brand new traction packages are set to be dumped by SWR as are a batch of 350s from whatever London Midland is called these days.

 

However such things have nothing to do with HS2 and are more to do with ministers at the DfT feeling the need to offer up some short term bribes to the electorate to hide the other screw ups they have been making.

[Northmoor]

23 hours ago, lmsforever said:

Add this to our daily gridlock and its going to be chaos.

Oh pu-lease.  700 vehicle movements a week?  Divided by a 6 day week and 12hr working day, that's an additional vehicle about every six minutes.  Roads that are grid-locked are carrying 1000s of vehicles per hour.

Edited May 17, 2019 by Northmoor
Swapped numbers between head and fingers.....

[Mike Storey]

1 hour ago, lmsforever said:

 I am not making it up Italy has more space for new roads and railways  than the UK,  have you not heard of free speech I don't like this project but if you supporters had your way we would be barred from this thread.I will keep on picking up bad practice and bullying by the company.I suggest you have a look at whats been going on at Calvert the people there were being pushed aside but they fought back and made HS2 stop doing the desecration.Wild life is important in the UK and the contractors have been taking liberties and have been stopped.     I saw in the local paper that the bridge over the A413 outside of Wendover will stop the road being widened when asked about this the council were told that's it cant be changed.So keep expecting me to have my say   I DONT MAKE UP NOTIFICATIONS

 

The geographical and topographical facts about Italy speak for themselves - I am sorry you feel able to say otherwise. You might have made a better case about France, but there we are.

 

I have heard of free speech - it was very big in the 60's. But if you think it means you can say anything you like and it won't be challenged, where inaccurate or improbable, forget it.

 

But if HS2 as a company, or their contractors, are misbehaving, alleged or actual, then you have every right, and a duty, to point that out. I don't believe I have ever commented on any of those accusations on here (I remain to be corrected), as they are a local matter (usually), except where I know the issue has been legislated.

 

[phil-b259]

20 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

To clarify the netting of hedges etc.

 

its not illegal

 

removing hedges isn’t illegal

 

there are processes to follow, legal permits to obtain but only if your ecologist finds a protected species. If not, then you can crack on.

 

My client used netting at work on a new road scheme. It wasn’t the preferred option but process was followed. A month or so later, we dug the hedges out. For the loss of 200m of hedge, the client will plant over 1000m of new hedge.

 

Nor is removing trees - providing you comply with the rules around bird nesting season.

 

However my impression from what LMSforever said is that said rules are not being complied with - which is a perfectly valid criticism to make.

 

For example, over a decade ago one housing developer busy creating hundreds of new homes on the outskirts of Horley (Surrey) managed to arrange for a contractor to 'accidentally' cut down a large number of mature Oak trees subject to TPO orders on a bank holiday Monday when there were conveniently no council planning people in to respond and stop them.

 

As with many other such 'accidents' the developer apologised profusely, offered to plant a few more trees (where they wouldn't compromise the development of course) and pay the fine (which was much less than the cost for a single house).

 

Regrettably this sort of thing is not an isolated case.....

 

As such we should not dismiss LMSforevers concerns about the actions of the contractors HS2 uses to do its jobs.

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by phil-b259

[melmerby]

8 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Oh pu-lease.  700 vehicle movements a week?  Divided by a 6 day week and 12hr working day, that's an additional vehicle about every ten minutes.  Roads that are grid-locked are carrying 1000s of vehicles per hour.

Actually about 10 vehicles/hour but still small in the scheme of traffic levels.

[caradoc]

5 hours ago, locoholic said:

High speed does NOT equal high capacity. There's the small problem that stopping distances increase almost exponentially as speed increases, so headways increase. It's the same principal behind Smart Motorways that limit speed, instead of telling drivers to speed up because the road is full.. Yet again you seem to think that trains are exempt from the laws of physics. And the "marginal" extra costs are highly suspect.

 

I have never said that there is no need for a new railway line to be built. I just think that the design of HS2 is wrong, and it should be part of the classic rail network. The current trend for trains to be restricted to one route is producing a network that has no resiliance and where nearly-new trains are sent to the scrapheap when other lines are desperately short of rolling stock.

 

The almost total lack of criticism of HS2 on this forum, and the personal attacks on those that do put their head above the parapet says far more about the mentality of the average rail enthusiast than it does about the merits of HS2.

 

 

 

We have already tried upgrading the classic network, and as has been said here before, the West Coast Route Modernisation cost huge amounts of money, caused years of disrupted journeys, and has been found to be completely inadequate !

 

My support for HS2 does come (partly) from being a rail enthusiast, and therefore wanting railways to flourish, but also from my experience as a rail worker, part of whose career was in operational control for part of the WCML, and indeed from trying to travel between Scotland and England, especially when the WCRM was in full flow (or rather full trickle).

 

 

Edited May 17, 2019 by caradoc
Cock-up on the grammatical front

[phil-b259]

12 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

We have already tried upgrading the classic network, and as has been said here before, the West Coast Route Modernisation cost huge amounts of money, caused years of disrupted journeys, and has been found to be completely inadequate !

 

My support for HS2 does come (partly) from being a rail enthusiast, and therefore wanting railways to flourish, but also from my experience as a rail worker, part of whose career was in operational control for part of the WCML, and indeed from trying to travel between Scotland and England, especially when the WCRM was in full flow (or rather full trickle).

 

 

 

To be fair Locoholic was not suggesting a further upgrade - he was suggesting HS2 be built to classic British Standards (i.e. 125mph max and a few intermediate stations between London and Birmingham).

 

While such a railway would indeed provide lots of extra capacity - at the same time it would be a classic case of artificially constraining things / not future proofing for no good reason.

 

Its worth noting the effects of this on the roads - the A14 is a key east - west highway heavily used by lorries etc. but to save money even the brand new bits were built as a dual carriageway complete with footpaths and bridleways routed across it on the flat. Further sections are dogged by at grade junctions with side roads due to it being an online upgrade. Oh and because its not a motorway farm vehicles, cyclists and pedestrians can legally use it

 

Now on the face of things the cynics would say building it on the cheap (and not as a proper offline Motorway throughout) saved loads of cash and provided 90% of the benefits. However if you look a little deeper you spot the flaws which have become more significant as has traffic built up  (e.g. only 2 lanes so lots of 'elephant racing' as trucks slowly overtake each other, Pedestrians avoiding footpaths due to the danger of crossing such a busy + fast flowing road on the level, the presence of tractors and other slow moving vehicles causing hold ups, etc).

 

Had the A14 (and other roads like the A42, A34, etc) been built as proper motorways, many of their defects wouldn't exist and as a result they would flow better plus have a higher capacity (which could be further increased by using the 'Smart motorway' principle to provide further lanes.

 

HS2 is being built to proven LGV principles precisely to ensure it doesn't suffer from the railway equivalent of the defects found on the likes of the A14. Yes initially its enhanced features (such as the ability to cope with double deck trains) may seem expensive - but just as a hard shoulder on a motorway can be upgraded to a running lane later, being able to add double deck trains to boost capacity is a useful tool to have available.

 

 

 

 

[Arun Sharma]

3 hours ago, locoholic said:

And there's another patronising, arrogant personal comment! Obviously simply being a "railway person" means that you are superior!

 

 

No, not quite - but it could mean that a "railway person" might be expected to know how the railway is created, operated, maintained and improved upon via the mechanism of experience in actually doing some or all of these things. If I felt I needed to know about possible relationships between t.p.h, dwell times and acceleration/braking rates, I would ask a railwayman and not [in the first instance] a commuter.