HS2

[simon b]

A question for those in the know...

 

I keep hearing that the trains are to now run slower to save money. Is that true, and if so how fast are they now planning to run?

[Ron Ron Ron]

6 minutes ago, simon b said:

A question for those in the know...

 

I keep hearing that the trains are to now run slower to save money. Is that true, and if so how fast are they now planning to run?

There was a suggestion, from a report into the costs, or some such, that reducing the maximum line speed would reduce the need for slab track, meaning cheaper ballasted track could be used, saving X millions.

I’ve no idea if that cost saving measure has been adopted or not.

 

.

[Allegheny1600]

39 minutes ago, simon b said:

A question for those in the know...

 

I keep hearing that the trains are to now run slower to save money. Is that true, and if so how fast are they now planning to run?

I think it was mooted they may not run at 400kph (250mph) - they would still be bloomin fast if they run at around 320kph, which appears to be the current "standard" for high speed lines nowadays. As Ron says above though, if this means a more conventional looking track, it would be a big cost saving not to mention actual energy costs, catenary maintenance etc.

[simon b]

I'm surprised they don't just adopt the standards of hs1, surely that would keep the cost's down.

 

I had an intriguing thought about how well a re-geared pair of class 91's would fair, top and tailing a rake of mk4's.

Edited July 19, 2020 by simon b

[Allegheny1600]

17 minutes ago, simon b said:

I'm surprised they don't just adopt the standards of hs1, surely that would keep the cost's down. 

On the face of it, that would be a pretty sensible solution!

AIUI, our government wanted HS2 to be a bit of a landmark, a standout from the crowd with the rather high speed of 400kph/250mph which would have been really piling on the "high speed" part of the project, as previously discussed - not really what was needed but if you're going to build a new railway, you might as well go all out.

Coincidently, the Russians are aiming that high too, see: https://www.railwaygazette.com/high-speed/partnership-to-develop-400-km/h-high-speed-train-for-russia/56826.article

The distances in Russia may justify such speed but for the UK, no - not worth it.

[simon b]

1 hour ago, Allegheny1600 said:

On the face of it, that would be a pretty sensible solution!

AIUI, our government wanted HS2 to be a bit of a landmark, a standout from the crowd with the rather high speed of 400kph/250mph which would have been really piling on the "high speed" part of the project, as previously discussed - not really what was needed but if you're going to build a new railway, you might as well go all out.

Coincidently, the Russians are aiming that high too, see: https://www.railwaygazette.com/high-speed/partnership-to-develop-400-km/h-high-speed-train-for-russia/56826.article

The distances in Russia may justify such speed but for the UK, no - not worth it.

 I could see it working in Russia with the distances covered as you say, but for the short run that is HS2 it seems like the cost's do outweigh the benefits. With the way the cost's of this project are stacking up I imagine that 200kph will be seen as enough.

[Mark Saunders]

16 minutes ago, simon b said:

 I could see it working in Russia with the distances covered as you say, but for the short run that is HS2 it seems like the cost's do outweigh the benefits. With the way the cost's of this project are stacking up I imagine that 200kph will be seen as enough.

 

Once again the short sight saga and forgetting that there life between Birmingham and Scotland.

 

Do it properly first time rather than wait a few years for an upgrade.

[simon b]

1 hour ago, Mark Saunders said:

 

Once again the short sight saga and forgetting that there life between Birmingham and Scotland.

 

Do it properly first time rather than wait a few years for an upgrade.

I suppose it depends how much time is saved vs the extra cost.

[Mike Storey]

Given the vast majority of the line is already surveyed for the higher speed operation, I doubt much would be saved by realignment at this late stage. It is,of course, possible to ballast conventionally, away from tunnels, to save a few quid, and use the railway at lower speeds, until, or if, the higher speed becomes more attractive/conventional. But, there is either a loss in the number of paths, or an increase in the number of train sets required, or quite probably both, if top speed is reduced. The extra initial capital costs and the ongoing additional maintenance, crew and replacement costs of this must be added into the equation.

 

[Clearwater]

16 minutes ago, Mike Storey said:

Given the vast majority of the line is already surveyed for the higher speed operation, I doubt much would be saved by realignment at this late stage. It is,of course, possible to ballast conventionally, away from tunnels, to save a few quid, and use the railway at lower speeds, until, or if, the higher speed becomes more attractive/conventional. But, there is either a loss in the number of paths, or an increase in the number of train sets required, or quite probably both, if top speed is reduced. The extra initial capital costs and the ongoing additional maintenance, crew and replacement costs of this must be added into the equation.

 

of course if the line is despecced to save a few quid and conventional ballast is used, critics will spring up shouting “how typical, no foresight, why not go for gold standard at first and save cash later.” Etc etc

[Zomboid]

When this was mentioned a few pages back it seemed that the alignment is for 400kph, but they won't run at that speed normally. Of course, the alignment and tunnel bore sizes are the two things which cannot be upgraded at a later date, so it's absolutely right to build for 400kph now.

Upgrading the track or increasing the tension of the OLE are at least possible in future if they decide to save 50p on them now and half bake those elements.

[melmerby]

20 hours ago, simon b said:

I'm surprised they don't just adopt the standards of hs1, surely that would keep the cost's down.

 

I had an intriguing thought about how well a re-geared pair of class 91's would fair, top and tailing a rake of mk4's.

Can't imagine them reaching 320kph (around 200mph, IIRC the design speed for HS1), the Mk4s would fly off the track.

[melmerby]

19 hours ago, simon b said:

 I could see it working in Russia with the distances covered as you say, but for the short run that is HS2 it seems like the cost's do outweigh the benefits. With the way the cost's of this project are stacking up I imagine that 200kph will be seen as enough.

200kph is only 125mph, can't see that happening.

[simon b]

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

Can't imagine them reaching 320kph (around 200mph, IIRC the design speed for HS1), the Mk4s would fly off the track.

 

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

200kph is only 125mph, can't see that happening.

 

Oops, 300kph is what I should of said. I dont think it's too greater stretch to see a mk4 at 200mph. A short set managed 161mph back in the late 80's on normal track without too much bother, with the advance in tech since then it should be possible. The BT41 bogies as used under the mk4 has now been upgraded as the sig300, which is meant for 300kph running.

 

When the 91's were running with a hst power car at the other end of the train acceleration was quite rapid with over 8000hp, I can only imagine what it would be with 12000+hp on tap. 

 

It would be nice to beat our own record again.

Edited July 20, 2020 by simon b
Info added

[Zomboid]

According to the oracle of correctness, Wikipedia, on 25kV a 373 has 16400hp, and a 374 has 21000hp.

They're 400m trains of course, but still in another league compared to 91s (which are apparently developments of the APT power cars, so not exactly cutting edge when they were new).

I'd expect similar numbers, if not greater, to be needed for HS2 services.

[melmerby]

32 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

According to the oracle of correctness, Wikipedia, on 25kV a 373 has 16400hp, and a 374 has 21000hp.

They're 400m trains of course, but still in another league compared to 91s (which are apparently developments of the APT power cars, so not exactly cutting edge when they were new).

I'd expect similar numbers, if not greater, to be needed for HS2 services.

Even the 14 car 300m ATP only had 2 x 4000hp motor units.

[black and decker boy]

I think the chances of 91s being stored in good condition for over 6 years for use on HS2 are nill. Ditto the MK4s, some of which are being redeployed to TfW and GC with the unwanted carriages despatched for scrap.

 

Europhoenix have a deal to export a decent number of them for freight use.

 

technology has moved on since the 91&MK4 fleets were designed in the 80s so why would we try to use something that has already been declared outdated and replaced from its intended duties?

 

Running the 390s and 801s on HS2 would be a short term option if new trains were delayed but it would reduce capacity 

 

 

[simon b]

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

I think the chances of 91s being stored in good condition for over 6 years for use on HS2 are nill. Ditto the MK4s, some of which are being redeployed to TfW and GC with the unwanted carriages despatched for scrap.

 

Europhoenix have a deal to export a decent number of them for freight use.

 

technology has moved on since the 91&MK4 fleets were designed in the 80s so why would we try to use something that has already been declared outdated and replaced from its intended duties?

 

Running the 390s and 801s on HS2 would be a short term option if new trains were delayed but it would reduce capacity 

 

 

Obviously there will be new trains for the line, but if money is an issue they could be built at a later date. My thinking was that the 91's are surplus and could be put to use if needed. The 390 or 801 has no advantage over them as the design speed is the same, there was talk about using a 390 to try for the record but it never happened.

[Fenman]

Looking for a silver lining, perhaps in a Covid19 world we’ll see a move away from cramming as many people as possible into a small space. More spacious layouts with screening between passengers (perhaps even a revival of compartment stock!).

 

Encouraging modal shift is going to be even harder in a world where it’s not just that train seating is much less comfortable than that in my car, but where there’s an added risk of infection. 
 

So, no, I’d hate to see 91+Mk4 formations on HS2; it’s time for spacious comfort rather than 1980s sardine tins...
 

Paul

Edited July 21, 2020 by Fenman
Got my marks mixed up

[Zomboid]

If the trains aren't ready, the start of HS2 services will be delayed. Unless the plan is to allow 390s/ 80xs on long term (and given they are only good for 225kph, I doubt they would be), they will have to be fitted with the can signalling system that the high speed line will use which will be a big deal. 80x units have presumably been designed with ERTMS in mind, but integrating the modern version of that into what will be 20+ year old trains in the 390s will be a big design and acceptance issue.

 

And then there's the fact that they both have work of their own to do on the ECML/ WCML/ GWML.

 

91s and mk4s are being withdrawn because they're worn out, and they're not going to be in better shape in 6 years time. By then most of them will be wrapped around baked beans.

[black and decker boy]

18 minutes ago, Zomboid said:

If the trains aren't ready, the start of HS2 services will be delayed. Unless the plan is to allow 390s/ 80xs on long term (and given they are only good for 225kph, I doubt they would be), they will have to be fitted with the can signalling system that the high speed line will use which will be a big deal. 80x units have presumably been designed with ERTMS in mind, but integrating the modern version of that into what will be 20+ year old trains in the 390s will be a big design and acceptance issue.

 

And then there's the fact that they both have work of their own to do on the ECML/ WCML/ GWML.

 

91s and mk4s are being withdrawn because they're worn out, and they're not going to be in better shape in 6 years time. By then most of them will be wrapped around baked beans.

ERTMS is being rolled out for ECML now. Freight locos are in the design phase and fitment will begin soon.

 

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/news/britains-first-digital-railway-takes-major-step-forward-as-funding-and-partners-announced/

https://www.atkinsglobal.com/en-gb/media-centre/news-releases/2020/mar/2020-03-20

https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2020/06/22-government-confirms-digital-goahead-for.html

 

Design speed for 390s & 801s is 140mph as far as I know so yes, a long way from HS2 desired speeds but better than having a brand new empty railway should the worst happen and HS2 replaces some of the 390 diagrams on the WCML.

[simon b]

1 hour ago, black and decker boy said:

ERTMS is being rolled out for ECML now. Freight locos are in the design phase and fitment will begin soon.

 

https://www.networkrail.co.uk/news/britains-first-digital-railway-takes-major-step-forward-as-funding-and-partners-announced/

https://www.atkinsglobal.com/en-gb/media-centre/news-releases/2020/mar/2020-03-20

https://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2020/06/22-government-confirms-digital-goahead-for.html

 

Design speed for 390s & 801s is 140mph as far as I know so yes, a long way from HS2 desired speeds but better than having a brand new empty railway should the worst happen and HS2 replaces some of the 390 diagrams on the WCML.

 

Does that mean we are finally going to see 140mph running on the ECML?

[melmerby]

Class 8XX (&395) are part of Hitachi's A Train 300 series. (AT300)

There is also the AT400 series for very high speed lines (note 125/140 mph is classed as just "high speed")

 

BTW I'd like to know how the Avanti class 8XX will be able to do 125mph on the WCML without tilting.

[Edwin_m]

43 minutes ago, melmerby said:

Class 8XX (&395) are part of Hitachi's A Train 300 series. (AT300)

There is also the AT400 series for very high speed lines (note 125/140 mph is classed as just "high speed")

 

BTW I'd like to know how the Avanti class 8XX will be able to do 125mph on the WCML without tilting.

There are probably numerous places on the WCML where a non-tilting train could do more than 110mph.  It's just that to date nobody has wanted to do it badly enough to work out where they are and do all the paperwork to justify that and make the changes.  There were some HSTs on the route in the past, but I suspect if they'd been allowed to run faster they would just have caught up with the electric in front.  

[Pete the Elaner]

4 hours ago, Fenman said:

Looking for a silver lining, perhaps in a Covid19 world we’ll see a move away from cramming as many people as possible into a small space. More spacious layouts with screening between passengers (perhaps even a revival of compartment stock!).

 

Encouraging modal shift is going to be even harder in a world where it’s not just that train seating is much less comfortable than that in my car, but where there’s an added risk of infection. 
 

So, no, I’d hate to see 91+Mk4 formations on HS2; it’s time for spacious comfort rather than 1980s sardine tins...
 

Paul

 

I cannot see this changing.

TOCs will continue to strive for more passenger miles for less cost. This goes against spacious comfort...

Unless HS2 is made exclusively 1st class, which will price it out of reach for many customers, which defeats its purpose of relieving the current network.