HS2

[Northmoor]

20 hours ago, melmerby said:

Modern passenger trains are speed restricted by the twisty nature of the line from Lancaster to the Lune valley and from Shap to Penrith, not the gradient.

Anyone who doubts the ability of modern trains to cope with inclines should study the gradient profiles of TGV routes.

[2ManySpams]

On 16/01/2024 at 08:58, big jim said:

Reading that story also gives links to other HS2 related articles. This one from October, when the cancellation was first announced makes me laugh….

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-67004444

 

Includes these little gems 

 

Judith Cleaver moved to Water Orton for peace and quiet 

 

and 

 

Her asthma has been affected by poor air quality due to the construction works, she added.
 

and 

 

The whole of Water Orton is a tip, it is disgusting, the roads are a mess, the air pollution is awful - it is an absolute tip."

 

let’s take a snapshot of the peaceful picture postcard village of water orton as of 08:30 this morning, I’m sat in hams hall hence the blue dot

If your going for peace and quiet you shouldn’t move somewhere just north of the V of the main junctions of the M6/M42 which you can see is currently pretty much at a standstill as I type, also the A446 Lichfield road is showing red as people commute to the massive industrial estate and distribution centres of Hams hall and coleshill to the east of water orton, it’s not much better on the Minworth side of water orton either, you know the big industrial estate and Amazon distribution centre to the west of water orton but of course none of the above is causing her asthma to flare up, it’s being caused by the construction site 1/2 mile other side of the 10 lane wide motorway

pretty sure that there are also signs on the edge of water orton saying ‘no HS2 construction vehicles allowed beyond this point’ so if the village is a tip then maybe the residents should be looking a bit closer to home to find the cause 

 

 

And not forgetting the stink of the massive sewage treatment works.

[jamie92208]

9 hours ago, Northmoor said:

Anyone who doubts the ability of modern trains to cope with inclines should study the gradient profiles of TGV routes.

The first TGV line, Paris Lyon, had gradients  down to 1 in 29 but that has been dialled back on later lines.  I'm not certain but I think that about 1 in 45 is the limit now.  One of the factors was the need to reduce speed over the summits due to adhesion starting to dissappear as they went over the vertical curves at the summits. 

 

Jamie

[Ron Ron Ron]

18 hours ago, melmerby said:

West Midlands Mayor Andy Street officiated at the start of the Curzon Street station build yesterday and commented that they want the HS2 leg from Birmingham to Manchester to go ahead.

He said he was meeting the Transport Secretary next week to discuss ways of financing it. This would include the possibility of some private finance…………

 

 

Press reporting is suggesting that this move by Andy Street and Andy Burnham is looking at different options to HS2 Phase 2.

It includes looking at upgrades and bypasses on the existing WCML route and the possibility of a section of brand new line.

This isn’t HS2 Phase 2, which is considered too expensive.

 

There’s some mention of this route reaching the Stockport area, then joining a proposed NPR route.

 

 

.

[phil-b259]

8 minutes ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

Press reporting is suggesting that this move by Andy Street and Andy Burnham is looking at different options to HS2 Phase 2.

 

 

Which is STUPID!

 

I get that from a Political / PR perspective HS2 is considered too toxic to commit to building (particularly this side of a general election) but phase 2a taking it as far as Crewe (and for which parliamentary powers exist is quite frankly a no brainier! It also is going to cost much less than the proposed phase 2B as the amount of tunnelling is less and if people are really picky about names it could be rebranded as a stand alone 'Stafford & Stoke by-pass'

 

 

[corneliuslundie]

"if people are really picky about names"

Perhaps one starts a new project with a new name without the words "high speed" and then does exactly what would have been done for HS2A - but the politicians get off the hook and those who are convinced that HS2 is all about speed are bypassed.

Jonathan

[62613]

O.K., I'm getting my crayons out! My feeling is that phase 2A should be built, come what may. It does so much to increase capacity, it isn't true. As remarked somewhere else (Green Signals no. 6 I think, posted on here earlier), the other capacity buster was the leg from Crewe to Golborne. I'd abandon phase 2B as it stands and reinstate that; apart from crossing the Ship Canal and the Mersey, would there be any serious civil engineering problems on this part? 

[Ron Ron Ron]

 

 

 

 

 

.

[phil-b259]

1 hour ago, 62613 said:

O.K., I'm getting my crayons out! My feeling is that phase 2A should be built, come what may. It does so much to increase capacity, it isn't true. As remarked somewhere else (Green Signals no. 6 I think, posted on here earlier), the other capacity buster was the leg from Crewe to Golborne. I'd abandon phase 2B as it stands and reinstate that; apart from crossing the Ship Canal and the Mersey, would there be any serious civil engineering problems on this part? 

 

One of the big criticisms of the Golborne spur (and why it got binned a long time before  ahead of the rest of phase Phase 2B cancelled) was precisely the way it dumped all traffic back onto the WCML just as that reduced to double track!

 

To make the spur effective you would need to spend yet more money either widening the WCML through Wigan to create a 4 track railway all the way to Preston or extend HS2 to full-fill that function.

 

As such it makes zero sense to just build the Crewe - Golborne bit of phase 2 as if the cash needed to build it was available then it money would better be invested in upgrades of the WCML pinch points north of Crewe and would most likely be enough to deal with all the bottlenecks right through to Preston.

 

Now building HS2 as a Crewe - Preston line (and thus bypassing ALL the bottlenecks in one hit) is a different matter....

[62613]

9 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

9 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

One of the big criticisms of the Golborne spur (and why it got binned a long time before  ahead of the rest of phase Phase 2B cancelled) was precisely the way it dumped all traffic back onto the WCML just as that reduced to double track!

 

To make the spur effective you would need to spend yet more money either widening the WCML through Wigan to create a 4 track railway all the way to Preston or extend HS2 to full-fill that function.

 

As such it makes zero sense to just build the Crewe - Golborne bit of phase 2 as if the cash needed to build it was available then it money would better be invested in upgrades of the WCML pinch points north of Crewe and would most likely be enough to deal with all the bottlenecks right through to Preston.

 

Now building HS2 as a Crewe - Preston line (and thus bypassing ALL the bottlenecks in one hit) is a different matter....

Now building HS2 as a Crewe - Preston line (and thus bypassing ALL the bottlenecks in one hit) is a different matter....

Agreed! Crossing the Ribble might be fun, but it makes sense to do it properly. Make the junction somewhere around Garstang!

Edited January 26 by 62613

[phil-b259]

37 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Agreed! Crossing the Ribble might be fun, but it makes sense to do it properly. Make the junction somewhere around Garstang!

 

Given virtually every single operator would want to stop services at Preston for commercial reasons there would be no need to bypass Preston itself - a brand new high speed line (not necessarily 250mph by the way - if it had to be limited to 140mph so as to navigate through the rather built up south Lancashire area)  which merged with the WCML just to the south of the city would be fine.

[GordonC]

51 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

One of the big criticisms of the Golborne spur (and why it got binned a long time before  ahead of the rest of phase Phase 2B cancelled) was precisely the way it dumped all traffic back onto the WCML just as that reduced to double track!

 

To make the spur effective you would need to spend yet more money either widening the WCML through Wigan to create a 4 track railway all the way to Preston or extend HS2 to full-fill that function.

 

As such it makes zero sense to just build the Crewe - Golborne bit of phase 2 as if the cash needed to build it was available then it money would better be invested in upgrades of the WCML pinch points north of Crewe and would most likely be enough to deal with all the bottlenecks right through to Preston.

 

Now building HS2 as a Crewe - Preston line (and thus bypassing ALL the bottlenecks in one hit) is a different matter....

 

Where does the WCML drop down to double track between Golborne and Wigan? Is that not 4-tracks all the way through until north of Wigan North Western.

 

Then the bit from around Standish through Coppull to Euxton used to be 4 tracks so would it not be relatively simple to relay those or is that not possible now?

Edited January 26 by GordonC

[The Stationmaster]

27 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

One of the big criticisms of the Golborne spur (and why it got binned a long time before  ahead of the rest of phase Phase 2B cancelled) was precisely the way it dumped all traffic back onto the WCML just as that reduced to double track!

 

To make the spur effective you would need to spend yet more money either widening the WCML through Wigan to create a 4 track railway all the way to Preston or extend HS2 to full-fill that function.

 

As such it makes zero sense to just build the Crewe - Golborne bit of phase 2 as if the cash needed to build it was available then it money would better be invested in upgrades of the WCML pinch points north of Crewe and would most likely be enough to deal with all the bottlenecks right through to Preston.

 

Now building HS2 as a Crewe - Preston line (and thus bypassing ALL the bottlenecks in one hit) is a different matter....

Has all the land been given away i wonder.  Even in 1914, and still in 1990 (albeit with some minor changes approaching  Wigan) all the ex LNWR WCML was either quadruple, or even sextuple, all of the 21.75 miles  from Golborne Jcn to Preston except for the 7.5 miles between Wigan North jcn and Balshaw Jcn

 

Quadrupling the stretch north of Wigan station might well present problems in places, especially in Wigan itself buta lot of that section still lies in open country.  Yes it would cost money but carried oiut with effectib  ve project management it is only going to be in the millions and way short of billions.

 

Creating. a totally new HS2 route between Crewe and Preston would be a massively expensive project passing through a lot of built up areas (even more so than going to Golborne Jcn) and I doubt it would stand up as a project compared with other ways of increasing route capacity north of Golborne Jcn where even if the track no longer exists the basic earthworks (and some underbridges) do.

 

42 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Agreed! Crossing the Ribble might be fun, but it makes sense to do it properly.

Are the original bridges south of Preston (for sextuple track) still all there?

[GordonC]

6 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

Has all the land been given away i wonder.  Even in 1914, and still in 1990 (albeit with some minor changes approaching  Wigan) all the ex LNWR WCML was either quadruple, or even sextuple, all of the 21.75 miles  from Golborne Jcn to Preston except for the 7.5 miles between Wigan North jcn and Balshaw Jcn

 

Quadrupling the stretch north of Wigan station might well present problems in places, especially in Wigan itself buta lot of that section still lies in open country.  Yes it would cost money but carried oiut with effectib  ve project management it is only going to be in the millions and way short of billions.

 

Creating. a totally new HS2 route between Crewe and Preston would be a massively expensive project passing through a lot of built up areas (even more so than going to Golborne Jcn) and I doubt it would stand up as a project compared with other ways of increasing route capacity north of Golborne Jcn where even if the track no longer exists the basic earthworks (and some underbridges) do.

 

Are the original bridges south of Preston (for sextuple track) still all there?

 

I think the 6-tracks south of Preston are still there, but dont think that goes all that far before dropping to 4 tracks.

 

The finances of building an entirely new route north of Liverpool/Wigan/Manchester area surely wouldn't add up so any construction north of that would be more about capacity as a freight corridor rather than speed for passengers. Restoring Quad track where it had been before but reduced to double track would have to be a far more realistic option

[phil-b259]

4 minutes ago, GordonC said:

 

Where does the WCML drop down to double track between Golborne and Wigan? Is that not 4-tracks all the way through until north of Wigan North Western.

 

Then the bit from around Standish through Coppull to Euxton used to be 4 tracks so would it not be relatively simple to relay those or is that not possible now?

 

I'm not sure of the exact details off the top of my head but I do remember several members more familiar with NW England being very derisive about the spur terminating where it did for capacity issues.

 

The nub of the matter is that from wherever HS2 finishes up to Lancaster there needs to be a continuous 4 track railway up to Preston. If that can be done by simply reinstating 'rationalised infrastructure then thats great - but from other peoples comments I understood that parts of it have only ever been double track and would therefore require widening 

[62613]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I'm not sure of the exact details off the top of my head but I do remember several members more familiar with NW England being very derisive about the spur terminating where it did for capacity issues.

 

The nub of the matter is that from wherever HS2 finishes up to Lancaster there needs to be a continuous 4 track railway up to Preston. If that can be done by simply reinstating 'rationalised infrastructure then thats great - but from other peoples comments I understood that parts of it have only ever been double track and would therefore require widening 

The chap with the knowledge of railways around Wigan is Apollo.

[corneliuslundie]

I seem to remember that a criticism of the Golborne spur was that the junction was to be with the slow lines. Or am I imagining?

Jonathan

Correction. I was remembering the wrong junction. See below that it was to be a flying junction to the fast lines.

Edited January 27 by corneliuslundie

[62613]

Certainly at Handsacre, that seems to be the case.

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I'm not sure of the exact details off the top of my head but I do remember several members more familiar with NW England being very derisive about the spur terminating where it did for capacity issues.

 

The nub of the matter is that from wherever HS2 finishes up to Lancaster there needs to be a continuous 4 track railway up to Preston. If that can be done by simply reinstating 'rationalised infrastructure then thats great - but from other peoples comments I understood that parts of it have only ever been double track and would therefore require widening 

Could you explain why Phil?  Surely the need for additional running lines is driven either by increases in total path requirements beyond a certain point or by greater divergence of speed differentials.  So how or why would that happen?

[GordonC]

2 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I'm not sure of the exact details off the top of my head but I do remember several members more familiar with NW England being very derisive about the spur terminating where it did for capacity issues.

 

The nub of the matter is that from wherever HS2 finishes up to Lancaster there needs to be a continuous 4 track railway up to Preston. If that can be done by simply reinstating 'rationalised infrastructure then thats great - but from other peoples comments I understood that parts of it have only ever been double track and would therefore require widening 

 

I think its pretty limited what has only ever been double-track to between Wigan North Western and Standish

[jamie92208]

I don't know the exact geography but I think that there used to be a 2 track Wigan bypass.  The name the Whelly line cones to mind or something like that. Certainly it is now two track for some distance past Wigan and from what I can remember there are several miles, probably up to near Leyland that used to be 4 track but are now just 2..  On the approaches to  Preston IIRC there is an unused set of spans across the Ribble with out of use sidings on the though with trees growing in the four foot.  So there is scope for recreating some if not all of that infrastructure. 

 

Jamie

[Compound2632]

9 minutes ago, jamie92208 said:

I don't know the exact geography but I think that there used to be a 2 track Wigan bypass.  The name the Whelly line cones to mind or something like that.

 

 

[Embedded link to Wikipedia Commons.]

[phil-b259]

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Could you explain why Phil?  Surely the need for additional running lines is driven either by increases in total path requirements beyond a certain point or by greater divergence of speed differentials.  So how or why would that happen?

Erm - given that the original point of HS2 was to increase capacity then it’s logical to assume that any trains it dumped onto the WCML at Golbourne would be additional to what already was running over the WCML in that area (the former express pathways to / from Crewe having been re-used to boost other service groups)
 

This was cited as a problem by several people familiar with the area because the current infrastructure was already being fully utilised and there simply wasn’t room for any additional services.

 

They also pointed out that one of the critical areas through Wigan has only ever been double track since it was first built and this would still be a bottleneck even if additional tracks were reinstated in other areas which saw rationalisation undertaken in the 1970s.

[melmerby]

9 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Are the original bridges south of Preston (for sextuple track) still all there?

 

8 hours ago, GordonC said:

I think the 6-tracks south of Preston are still there, but dont think that goes all that far before dropping to 4 tracks.

Drops to 4 tracks to pass under Leyand Road  (B5254)

 

Wigan (North Western) to Balshaw Lane Junction (Euxton) is two tracks

Edited January 26 by melmerby

[APOLLO]

Wiganer here. I live right alongside the 2 track WCML 1 mile north of Wigan - THE bottleneck.

 

Golborne (proposed junction) to Bamfurlong is 4 track.  (2 miles approx).

 

Bamfurlong to Wigan South Jcn (Just south of Wigan NW station) is currently 6 track, then 5 tracks for last mile. More or less dead straight - no problem.

 

Wigan NW north to Euxton 2 tracks - THE bottleneck, then 4 tracks to Preston & 2 tracks beyond.

 

There were 4  tracks from Standish Jcn to Euxton (4 miles or so) but 2 tracked in 1973 when electrified.

Could easily be reinstated.

The Wigan by pass Whelley loop (Bamfurlong to Standish) was closed at the same time as electrification but the route bed is mostly still intact. I doubt this will be rebuilt.

 

Anyway there is no money so bu**er all will happen re track capacity improvements around Coccium (Roman Wigan).

 

I cant wait to see the Daventry - Mossend DIESEL hauled container trains slogging up the 1 in 150 bank alongside my house up Boars Head bank being chased by the 225 mph HS2 premium fare expresses to Glasgow !!!

 

225 mph trains whizzing past my house - Gee Whizz, can't wait !!!!!

 

Edited to add. 

4 tracking Wigan NW to Standish would be very costly, a very built up area (look on google maps).

I very much doubt this happening.

 

Brit15

 

 

Edited January 26 by APOLLO