HS2 under review

[griffgriff]

Not having trains like this (I can’t believe I’m writing this but that’s another story) clogging up the slow lines must make a difference to capacity?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=coal+trains+on+the+midland+mainline+in+the+1980s&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjIj8CnjaPkAhUKyaQKHX_xCHgQ_AUoAXoECAwQAQ&biw=1024&bih=657&dpr=2#imgrc=7BwWOgTFL0rQqM

 

Note I’m aware that High speed rail needs a lot of space to ensure adequate signalling safety margins / train separation..... but surely with a half hour London service from the East Midlands the previous train would be half way to the capital. 

 

Griff

[pete_mcfarlane]

24 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

Not having trains like this (I can’t believe I’m writing this but that’s another story) clogging up the slow lines must make a difference to capacity?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=coal+trains+on+the+midland+mainline+in+the+1980s&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjIj8CnjaPkAhUKyaQKHX_xCHgQ_AUoAXoECAwQAQ&biw=1024&bih=657&dpr=2#imgrc=7BwWOgTFL0rQqM

 

Note I’m aware that High speed rail needs a lot of space to ensure adequate signalling safety margins / train separation..... but surely with a half hour London service from the East Midlands the previous train would be half way to the capital. 

 

Griff

 

As has been pointed out already, the problem is south of Bedford where the slow lines are now full of Thameslink EMUs, They've taken all of the capacity freed up by not running those freights. 

[Ravenser]

33 minutes ago, runs as required said:

A Vision of a Flexible Future

Another fleeting thought about the HS2 Review - based upon German  and Spanish practice.

1. As someone has pointed out we have willingly cleared a large chunk of (formerly interesting townscape) alongside Euston station that must surely be extraordinarily valuable in both monetary and/or functional/cultural value.
2. If similarly the Curzon St terminus were to be dropped in favour of a higher capacity through station further east, then the city centre site could likewise be available for 'City Beautiful' future developments.
3. Now the alternative fleeting vision:
   I'm always charmed by the way the international trains interact with the A Bahn trains  through Berlin (Friedrichstrasse etc.),  
4. So why not Talgo style HSTs that can twist and turn along Heritage lines (and through through existing and future Crossrail routings) as well as blasting along brand new alignment (preferably corridors containing existing |(or narrowed) motorways.
5. This allows the route and timetable planners a much broader canvas upon which to distribute capacity and headways and better choice of locations for realignments and route improvement: such as

 

• running via airports;
• Higher speed capacity on the Liverpool/Leeds/York/Hull axes; 
• through-running across London;
• E-W routes from East Anglia across via Bletchley to the S &W
• Galashiels/Hawick/Carlisle/Newcastle (via Kielder timber haulage?)
• North Wales resorts to Cardiff via Wrexham
• inland route replacing Dawlish
• more?

Gets hat ... coat before you lot all start ABUSING ME WITH CAPS LOCK AND BOLD ON

 

 

 

 

The idea that the existence of the SE of England is immoral and we should refuse to recognise or pander to it is nuts.

 

Historically speaking, the existence of large concentrations of people in the North of England, Scotland and South Wales is a huge anomaly caused by the Industrial Revolution.   If you look at population distributions at any date from 1750 back, the vast bulk of the population of Britain were to be found in Southern England, East Anglia and the Midlands - and the North, Scotland, and Wales were wild sparsely populated and remote areas. All that is happening is a gradual reversion to the normal distribution of people within the British Isles, Compared to 1700 AD, 1400 AD, 1000 AD, or 300 AD, the distribution of the population is already abnormally skewed towards the North, Scotland, and S Wales. London has been the largest settlement in the country by a country mile pretty well continuously for 2000 years 

 

Any schemes for driving large numbers out of the SE to more "morally-legitimate" regions by means of governmental whips-and-scorpions are therefore as fundamentally misconceived as schemes to make water flow UP a waterfall. What you are proposing is the transport equivalent of suggesting we should  solve water supply by making rivers flow upstream "because there's plenty of water in the sea and we need it brought to where its needed". Yes if over-population is an issue, then you could try to stop any additional people settling in Britain from abroad, thus removing the largest source of population growth. But that does nothing to deal with the needs of those already here.

 

There are about 20 million people  in Southern and Eastern England. Of course their transport needs should be served , and as rail and public transport are most effective in densely populated areas , those will be the strongest areas for those modes.

 

Dealing with your suggestions 

 

1. The stations at Heathrow, Stansted, and Manchester airports are termini on branches. Gatwick and Birmingham are  on congested mainlines - severely congested in the case of Birmingham.. You would have to demolish an awful lot of lineside property between Coventry and New Street to quadruple that section - it's built up probably for 60% + of the distance. I flinch at the implications of carving a slot of demolition for 5 miles from the edge of Brum into the city centre to do it..... East Midlands and Glasgow Airports have recently recieved Parkway stations , but don't seem huge traffic generators

 

Furthermore almost none of those points can be added as nodes to intercity services on existing routes. From Gatwick you can get conveniently to Brighton or Victoria. Birmingham Intl has been there for 45 years without changing the way the world works - it aint practical to re-route all WCML expresses through Brum and close the Trent Valley , in order that they can serve the airport... Bhm New Street is again at breaking point. Little more can be done to increase capacity - it's already had a multi-billion upgrade in the last decade , and the thing sits in a crater in the city centre, so it cannot be extended. A new station at Curzon St is the best scheme for additional station capacity in Central Bhm that anyone can devise

 

2.    The region served has about 25%-30% of the population of the SE.  The terrain is severely unfavourable. The new Woodhead Tunnel was a fairly spectacular example of cost overrun and delay to a major rail project - and the Woodhead Route was STILL subject to a 60mph line limit. Unless you're proposing an equivalent of the Gotthard Base Tunnel driven from Manchester to Leeds - at staggering expense and subject to a line limit no higher than 100mph - the Pennines are a huge complication weighing on any proposal.

 

The idea that communications within the second most populous conurbation is far more important than links between it and a conurbation 4 times the size is, shall we say, odd.

 

3.   Er how? The loading gauge through the Widened Lines is notoriously constricted - Class 31s were retained because they were pretty well the only loco capable of getting down there for Thameslink construction trains. The MML south of Bedford remains under serious capacity pressure despite a hugely expensive upgrade project. The E London line was severed a generation ago, and anyway faced into Liverpool St. London Overground from New Cross to Dalston Junction is hardly a candidate as a route for long-distance trains. The only serious cross-London capacity is represented by CTRL from St Pancras to Ebbsfleet, and Crossrail - both huge multi-billion new build projects . When people complain about too much money being spent on new rail infrastructure for London its these 4 projects above all they are denouncing...

 

The only major route South of London is to the Continent, and Eurostar North of London has completely failed to fly as a project, over 25 years.

 

4. This is an unbelieveably tortuous and slow route for traffic that's not there. Simply change at Stratford to Crossrail and Old Oak/Reading to GW . Job done. By routing HS2 through a station at Old Oak with interchange to Crossrail you provide a 1-change route from major WCML stations to Heathrow, Given where everything is, this is probably the best fix anyone could come up with for access from LHR to the InterCity network 

 

 

5.  Pass me the microscope and I may be able to see the traffic flow south of Hawick.... At present there is no obvious capacity issue between the Central Belt of Scotland and England , though there is a speed issue on the WCML. The Waverley Route  was also subject to speed limits due to curvature and cannot offer a solution to the transit time issue. While I'd like to see the Borders line extended to Hawick, I think a line from the Galashiels area to Berwick along the Border would serve more substantial communities than anything south of Hawick. (Riccarton Jnct was a lonely place......) But coming up with a route that manages to link the various towns without tunnelling through mountain ridges eludes me, and the population served is perhaps 250,000... Besides creating transport links between the part of Scotland adjoining England and Edinburgh serves the political agenda of Scottish Nationalism - creating rail links between the Borders and England doesn't. 

 

This is a minor irrelevance

 

6. Nobody in N Wales wants to go to Cardiff. They want to go to Liverpool and Manchester  . More tunnels under mountain ridges

 

7. As has been extensively documented on here, most of the population of Devon lives in S Devon. Re-rooting the W of England mainline via Dartmoor and away from S Devon is therefore folly. Serving Tavistock and Okehampton would be nice, but those on the ground say that the cost-benefit for reinstatement north of Tavistock cannot be brought anywhere near viable levels - let alone the levels achieved by HS2 cost/benefit 

 

Frankly I would have been more impressed if you had proposed reinstating the Peak Forest route and the E Lincolnshire line, and extending the Midland from Sheffield to Bradford on a 100mph alignment. 

 

But not that much more impressed...

 

Do you have interests in a company making tunnel-boring machines??

 

[Rugd1022]

Added to the problem south of Bedford is the gradient involved, if a southbound freight is regulated at Bedford North or South Junction it's a damned awful slow plod from a standing start on full power up to Leagrave, even  if you're lucky you still don't get up to maximum speed again until Luton Airport Parkway or Chiltern Green.

[Ravenser]

49 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

I agree with your observation regarding Leicester. 

 

My suggestion to create capacity further south..... either extend..... or cutback crossrail trains. So either more seats up north or more track capacity further south? Thoughts?

 

Griff

 

 

Crossrail is east /west :  Shenfield/Stratford to Old Oak/Reading.  You mean Thameslink.

 

Please remember that until the Thameslink 2000 works were completed , Thameslink north of Farringdon had a load-factor of 133% of official full-and-standing capacity in the peaks, the worst in the country... Although they now have 12 car trains not 8 car, this route is apparently still congested from Bedford to West Hampstead. 

 

Scrapping the entire local service on one of the most heavily loaded commuter services in the country, just after pouring money into the route is not credible . |Nor would it solve the problem of lack of platform capacity at St Pancras . Axing trains using St Pancras (Thameslink) low level in favour of services using the very busy 4 MML platforms at St Pancras won't work.

 

It would be nice to see electric services extended up to Mkt Harborough and an hourly local service extended from Bedford to Mkt Harborough with several intermediate stations candidates for reopening . This would take the strain of serving Kettering, Wellingboro and Mkt Harboro off EMT. The Corby trains can be sent down the rat hole onto Thameslink after electrification. 

 

But all of this is modest tweaks to outer-suburban services in the SE , not a meaningful attempt to provide for long distance rail to the North of England

 

And since Thameslink operates both south and north of london, axing a Thameslink service north of London implies axing it's continuation south of the river...

 

Frankly the alternative ideas are making HS2 look very good indeed

[black and decker boy]

MML has 3 key problems

 

1) Thameslink now get priority on the southern section, using both slow & fast line capacity

2) OLE doesn’t extend very far north

3) St Pancras doesn’t have enough platforms for domestic use

 

whether you can cure all of those and create any capacity that helps the WCML or ECML based long distance services is debatable. It certainly doesn’t help the commuter service on the WCML and ECML

 

such an approach would remove the need for HS2 phase 2b and the Toton & Sheffield stations which would save money and may be the outcome of the review, HS2 to Birmingham, Crewe & Manchester only. HS3 to then cross west to East to link to Leeds & the NE.

[The Stationmaster]

8 hours ago, rockershovel said:

 

Im afraid that I am unable to believe that without centralised planning, and government action,  rail will make any impact on JIT manufacturing. On that basis, HS2 would go from Southampton and Tilbury to Oxford and Coventry. DIRFT is already operating, and the whole industry is hostage to the next round of the EU briding someone to move a factory to Croatia, or doing a deal with Japan to import directly (both of which are already happening, stay or leave). 

 

 

There is already a viable, and busy, freight route from Southampton to Oxford and Coventry and beyond with container trains using it hourly in both directions for most of the 24 hours of the day, and sometimes more frequently and that route has had quite a bit of money spent on it.  And building HS2 would make the principal diversionary route for that particular route far more secure fr or extra freight traffic use in the future.  Building HS2 will, by releasing capacity on the WCML make the northern extension of  that route, but particularly the one from Tilbury better in capacity terms.

 

As for JIT we were doing that 30 years ago on BR and it still goes on today so we long ago made an impact on certain production processes to the extent that certain car factories would have come to a standstill within a few hours if a train had been cancelled.  And I suppose if you care to go back to the 1970s v certain constructors of motorways in England would have run out of material within a day or so if trains had been cancelled.  JIT is nothing new to the UK rail freight business, it's just the passenger trains that get in the way. 

[melmerby]

2 hours ago, Phil Parker said:

 

. Not so sure the Brum end will be so popular, efforts to move the city centre in that direction haven't worked very well to date, but if the land is cheap enough, it will find willing buyers.

It was derelict even before HS2 was dreamt up.

It's like a lot of areas immediately surrounding the centre. 

They were hives of smallish industry but suffered badly from the downturn of manufacturing, leaving lots of medium size unoccupied former factories.

Bradford Street and the surrounding area is the same. Only recenty has some development been taking place. The former Harrisons (curtain fittings) factory has been extended and re-purposed as quality office space, at least 2 other sites are currently being developed for housing.

[griffgriff]

1 hour ago, pete_mcfarlane said:

 

As has been pointed out already, the problem is south of Bedford where the slow lines are now full of Thameslink EMUs, They've taken all of the capacity freed up by not running those freights. 

Sorry.... in my previous post I mentions crossrail..... I meant thameslink..... 

 

as a a reminder.... I stated they should be extended of cut back.

 

Griff

[griffgriff]

46 minutes ago, Ravenser said:

 

 

Crossrail is east /west :  Shenfield/Stratford to Old Oak/Reading.  You mean Thameslink.

 

Please remember that until the Thameslink 2000 works were completed , Thameslink north of Farringdon had a load-factor of 133% of official full-and-standing capacity in the peaks, the worst in the country... Although they now have 12 car trains not 8 car, this route is apparently still congested from Bedford to West Hampstead. 

 

Scrapping the entire local service on one of the most heavily loaded commuter services in the country, just after pouring money into the route is not credible . |Nor would it solve the problem of lack of platform capacity at St Pancras . Axing trains using St Pancras (Thameslink) low level in favour of services using the very busy 4 MML platforms at St Pancras won't work.

 

It would be nice to see electric services extended up to Mkt Harborough and an hourly local service extended from Bedford to Mkt Harborough with several intermediate stations candidates for reopening . This would take the strain of serving Kettering, Wellingboro and Mkt Harboro off EMT. The Corby trains can be sent down the rat hole onto Thameslink after electrification. 

 

But all of this is modest tweaks to outer-suburban services in the SE , not a meaningful attempt to provide for long distance rail to the North of England

 

And since Thameslink operates both south and north of london, axing a Thameslink service north of London implies axing it's continuation south of the river...

 

Frankly the alternative ideas are making HS2 look very good indeed

Yep..... my mistake regarding Crossrail/Thames link

 

 

....the fact remains that without a dedicated solution to the problem a holistic approach is called for.

 

Griff

[caradoc]

2 hours ago, dibber25 said:

We should be looking at limiting movement and restricting capacity in the future. Technology is making working at home more and more commonplace. The planet cannot stand all the travel and movement that's taking place because, however we power it, there is an environmental cost. Coming generations will need to make some very hard decisions about population growth , movement etc. At some point, we have to be satisfied with what we have, not evermore striving for 'growth' in everything. HS2 might have some justification if it meant an end to Heathrow expansion but with a bit of thought for the real future, both should be dropped, and the sooner the better. (CJL)

 

I fully agree with restricting movement in future, as long as it applies to other people and not me !

 

Sorry to be sarcastic but I believe that is, and will be, the opinion of many, if not most, people, up to and including famous actors and Royal personnel. How to change that mindset will be a major issue. 

 

[caradoc]

1 hour ago, griffgriff said:

Not having trains like this (I can’t believe I’m writing this but that’s another story) clogging up the slow lines must make a difference to capacity?

 

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=coal+trains+on+the+midland+mainline+in+the+1980s&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=inv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjIj8CnjaPkAhUKyaQKHX_xCHgQ_AUoAXoECAwQAQ&biw=1024&bih=657&dpr=2#imgrc=7BwWOgTFL0rQqM

 

Note I’m aware that High speed rail needs a lot of space to ensure adequate signalling safety margins / train separation..... but surely with a half hour London service from the East Midlands the previous train would be half way to the capital. 

 

Griff

 

The basic off-peak service from the East Midlands to London is four trains per hour, two from Nottingham and two from Sheffield via Derby.

[griffgriff]

Just now, caradoc said:

 

The basic off-peak service from the East Midlands to London is four trains per hour, two from Nottingham and two from Sheffield via Derby.

 

 

Thats true...... but intermixed with semifasts..... 

 

.... that stop everywhere and can make a journey to London torturous

 

I’m sure an improved timetable would help.....East Midlands Parkway has 2 trains an hour to Nottingham.... 10 mins apart.

 

The MML needs a major rethink, not just a prod and a poke, to make it work properly.

 

Griff

[RedgateModels]

23 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

I fully agree with restricting movement in future, as long as it applies to other people and not me !

 

Sorry to be sarcastic but I believe that is, and will be, the opinion of many, if not most, people, up to and including famous actors and Royal personnel. How to change that mindset will be a major issue. 

 

 

Well, I changed jobs (almost) specifically to be nearer home. 20 miles less per day, 100 miles per week, 5000 (ish) miles a year less. Even with my far from frugal WRX Impreza I can get by on a tankful a month if I don't go anywhere else than work and back. Working from home is fine until school holidays etc, then you are expected to be a childminder too

Edited August 27, 2019 by RedgateModels

[Joseph_Pestell]

We seem to have digressed again - from HS2 to MML.

 

But I have just taken a quick look at Google Earth and I don't think it would be that difficult to build a raft above Midland Road and have at least one more platform, probably two. Might mean making Midland Rd bus & taxi only but that could be quite a good thing.

[griffgriff]

25 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

We seem to have digressed again - from HS2 to MML.

 

But I have just taken a quick look at Google Earth and I don't think it would be that difficult to build a raft above Midland Road and have at least one more platform, probably two. Might mean making Midland Rd bus & taxi only but that could be quite a good thing.

Not at all..... if HS2 isn’t built..... where’s the capacity going to come from? .... and if it can come from somewhere....and again we are probably talking holistically..... then it becomes an argument against it.

 

Griff

[Joseph_Pestell]

7 minutes ago, griffgriff said:

Not at all..... if HS2 isn’t built..... where’s the capacity going to come from? .... and if it can come from somewhere....and again we are probably talking holistically..... then it becomes an argument against it.

 

Griff

 

Are you answering a different question?

[Phil Parker]

2 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

Are you answering a different question?

 

I'm not sure anyone is quite sure which question is being asked or answered. I think you are talking about improvements to the MML - if you want to go there, I suggest a different thread. This one needs to return to HS2. 

[woodenhead]

What the heck, lets just go there and say it.

 

What everyone wants is for the old Great Central to be reborn as HS2 - forget all the local passengers, they can extend the Met and Crossrail to Oxford for that.

 

Fast trains out of Marylebone, junction at Rugby for Birmingham because no NIMBYs that matter north of Watford so new line to Birmingham from there.  Reinstate the bridge over the WCML then forge along the old alignment, run roughshod through the GCR South and GCR North Railways, new station in Nottingham in the cavity left by Nottingham Victoria - then line to a revitalised Sheffield Victoria where the line heads west to Manchester over Woodhead (making all those Woodhead fanatics feel smug) and a new north line up to Leeds from Penistone,

 

There all solved.

[melmerby]

3 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

Fast trains out of Marylebone, junction at Rugby for Birmingham because no NIMBYs that matter north of Watford so new line to Birmingham from there. 

 

There all solved.

Mmm. Weren't the GCR looking at getting to Birmingham at one point?

[Dava]

22 minutes ago, woodenhead said:

What the heck, lets just go there and say it.

 

What everyone wants is for the old Great Central to be reborn as HS2 - forget all the local passengers, they can extend the Met and Crossrail to Oxford for that.

 

Fast trains out of Marylebone, junction at Rugby for Birmingham because no NIMBYs that matter north of Watford so new line to Birmingham from there.  Reinstate the bridge over the WCML then forge along the old alignment, run roughshod through the GCR South and GCR North Railways, new station in Nottingham in the cavity left by Nottingham Victoria - then line to a revitalised Sheffield Victoria where the line heads west to Manchester over Woodhead (making all those Woodhead fanatics feel smug) and a new north line up to Leeds from Penistone,

 

There all solved.

Look closely at the geography. It could just work, at a price, until you get to Bede St., Leicester. There you stop forever, the route north is lost permanently. You also don't have a good route into Birmingham. Nice try!

 

[runs as required]

3 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Frankly I would have been more impressed if you had proposed reinstating the Peak Forest route and the E Lincolnshire line, and extending the Midland from Sheffield to Bradford on a 100mph alignment. 

Now you are talking 

I forgot Matlock to Peak Forest  - and Grimsby/Skeg/Boston (I drove down the A16 only last week).

 

Our family moved out of NE London in 1949 and I grew up alongside the Midland line through the Peak as a result of the Barlow Commission industrial relocation policies that held good from the 1930s through to (probably) 1979 when a whole lot of sensible planning strategies were scrapped in favour of the Market's "Hidden Hand".

 

And I've done well out of the crazy surge of the property market (much easier than tunnelling ?) though it is clearly disadvantaging my grandchildren's hopes in the SE.

Several of them are wondering about a less stressful re-location up to the North Tyne (once they get the Kielder Forest timber trucks off onto a single line of rails)  with 5G connectivity o the rest of the world.

 

Who was it who said strategic decisions can be better made by turning the Board around?

dh

Edited August 27, 2019 by runs as required

[black and decker boy]

The Chiltern Mainline & Marylebone also has no spare capacity nor room for 4 tracking, especially through the AONB, might be best to drop it into a tunnel south of Aylesbury and to create new platforms in London

[rockershovel]

Interesting and Informative post above, about the relationship between HS2 and JIT traffic Southampton/Oxford/Coventry. Why has it taken 168 pages for someone to mention this, amid the hundreds of posts about saving half an hour to Birmingham? 

 

This is one reason why projects like this are so contentious. They proceed, at immense cost, with the most nebulous of stated aims. No one WANTS a project like DIRFT near THEM, of course, but it brings employment. 

 

So, what about HS2 North of Coventry? Birmingham, I’m afraid, is stone dead; like most Northern cities, the heavy industry which was the foundation of its prosperity has been completely destroyed and the infrastructure razed to the ground. 

[woodenhead]

16 minutes ago, Dava said:

Look closely at the geography. It could just work, at a price, until you get to Bede St., Leicester. There you stop forever, the route north is lost permanently. You also don't have a good route into Birmingham. Nice try!

 

But this is HS2 - plough through what is there, they're probably all Labour voters or worse Remainers.

 

13 minutes ago, black and decker boy said:

The Chiltern Mainline & Marylebone also has no spare capacity nor room for 4 tracking, especially through the AONB, might be best to drop it into a tunnel south of Aylesbury and to create new platforms in London

 

This is all about votes , so who cares Chiltern can be absorbed into Crossrail, Marylebone only needs two tracks for HS2 trains - no stopping till Birmingham or Nottingham.

 

PS I'm not being serious but it's the same absurdity as aligning HS2 with the M1 or on a raft over the WCML or somehow using the MML.