HS2

[phil-b259]

12 hours ago, Northmoor said:

I think the Group Standard used to require any train to be able to decelerate to no more than 50mph when it got to the crossing.  I don't recall if that was based on the preceding signal changing to red in front of the driver or from the point where they were able to see the crossing was obstructed.

 

As far as I know there is no such requirement in terms of train declaration capability in official regulations pertaining to level crossings.

 

The only significant regulations which apply to level crossings as regards trains are for Automatic half barriers and Open Crossings.

 

On AHBs, there is requirement that 85% of trains MUST reach the crossing within 37 seconds of the crossing sequence being activated. If this is not going to be the case due to the performance gap between light passenger trains and heavy freights or the effects of nearby stations on stopping trains versus non stopping ones then permanent speed restrictions or other signalling controls MUST be provided to bring the differential to within the 85% requirement. AHBs also have an upper limit on the number of lines they cross (max 3) and the maximum line speed (110mph) which rules out their use on large chunks of the ECML even though in terms of road traffic an AHB would be fine.

 

Open crossings are limited to a maximum of 2 lines and after a number of incidents over the years have seen the speed at which trains may approach significantly reduced. I have a feeling its now 20mph, having originally been as high as 60mph.

 

However because of misuse by the general public Network Rail will not be installing any new AHBs* or open crossings - only equipping newly converted crossings with full barriers (using CCTV or obstacle detection) which also has the side benefit of allowing higher speeds.

 

 

* Where an existing AHB requires replacement due to the age of the equipment NR can (and does) replace them on a like for like basis providing there has been no increase in crossing usage by Pedestrians or road traffic over the decades since the AHB was first installed and the crossing doesn't have any issues with 'near misses'. Should there either of these have increased then conversion to a controlled crossing with full barriers MUST be proceeded with. 

 

Edited January 28 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

10 hours ago, Northmoor said:

My point being that these crossings have "grandfather rights"; a new route, even with the fastest trains at the lower of the two figures, would not be allowed level crossings.  Increase the maximum running speeds on either WCML or ECML and the crossings would need to be closed - I think?  

 

As a hypothetical example, if the Grimsby - Louth - Boston route was re-opened - with something like thirty crossings on the closed section - what would be the maximum line speed permitted?  I would guess at something like 50mph.

 

If the ECML went to 140mph running then I believe it would need all level crossings closed.

 

However I think this is more because of the increased level crossing downtimes* than an issue with the crossing itself because with a controlled full barrier setup in theory there are no derailment / collision risks** to any train whether it is going at 4mph or 140mph!

 

There may also be concerns over pedestrians getting fed up with waiting and vaulting over the barriers in some cases.

 

* Remembering that the crossings would need to be lowered even earlier than is now the case for 125mph running because trains would need to be given a 'green' signal (even if said signal is shown on an in cab display) at least 5 signal sections away compared to the current 4 and the effect that would have on local communities on either side of the crossings / traffic congestion / the ability for the signaller to lower the barriers (if people 'know' they are going to get 'trapped' by the barrier for ages they are less likely to stop when the red lights show and try and beat the barriers as they lower).

 

** Granted if someone was desperate enough, like criminals seeking to evade perusing police then there is always the risk of them smashing through the barriers in a bid to shake off the cops and that is obviously something that no level crossing can prevent happening.

 

Turning to a hypothetical reopened Grimsby - Louth - Boston route, there would be no issue with level crossings as the ORR have made it crystal clear that new / reopened railways MUST NOT INCLUDE ANY LEVEL CROSSINGS WHATSOEVER! If that condition was absolutely impossible to implement for any reason then the only acceptable crossing would be of the controlled full barrier type - which does not come with any speed restrictions as far as railway traffic is concerned.

Edited January 28 by phil-b259

[Ron Ron Ron]

From yesterday's Daily Telegraph.....

 

HS2 bosses in talks to scrap first-class seats

Operator considering the step to maintain passenger capacity because of train shortening

 

First-class seats could be removed from HS2 in order to avoid a drop in passenger capacity after Rishi Sunak scrapped the northern leg of the multi-billion-pound project.

The Prime Minister cut back proposals for Britain’s high-speed railway in October because of spiralling costs. 

 

A new railway will still be built between London and Birmingham, but HS2 trains will then be switched to the existing West Coast Mainline track from Birmingham to Manchester.

The revised plans mean there could be a reduction in seats from London to Manchester as HS2 trains are shorter than existing trains that travel along this route, according to an internal government document seen by the Financial Times.

The document suggests capacity could drop from 1,690 to 1,530 seats per hour between London and Manchester.

 

Increased capacity was one of the original aims of HS2.

Three industry and government figures have told the Financial Times that HS2 is now looking at ways to address the fall in seat capacity, although no changes to contracts have yet been made. 

 

One option being considered is scrapping all first-class seats.

A senior rail industry figure told the Financial Times: “They are serious about ripping out first class, it’s another nail in the coffin of this being some kind of superior rail service but it’s probably less embarrassing than ending up with a lower capacity.” 

Another industry executive said that giving up first-class seats would be “another downgrade” for the line and could potentially lower revenues.  

 

The planned extension to the stations in Crewe and to the station at Manchester Piccadilly have been scrapped, meaning HS2 trains travelling beyond Birmingham will have to be shorter than planned. 

Sir Jon Thompson, the project’s chair, told MPs earlier this month that HS2 trains will also be slower than the current Pendolinos because the new trains cannot tilt round bends.

“The HS2 train will go the same as a Pendolino on straight, 125mph, and round the bends it’ll go slower at 115mph.

So an HS2 from Birmingham to Manchester, which of course would be almost entirely the West Coast Mainline, would go slower than the Pendelino, yes,” he said. 

 

HS2 declined to comment.

The Department for Transport said no changes have been made to HS2 contracts. 

A statement said: “The contract to design and build HS2 trains includes both standard and first-class areas for passengers.”

 

 

.

[APOLLO]

Gawd it goes from bad to worse. No tilting, shorter trains, no first class, no doubt knifeboard seats AND no doubt a premium to be charged for the high speed bit from just north of Birmingham.

 

I bet the drivers plan a strike for the opening day also !!!

 

Forget the "problems" around Wigan, the "problems" lie ellsewhere, in London, by the side of the Thames.

 

What a fiasco.

 

Anyway this is the flyunder still existing at Standish Jcn. They can't cancel our dreams (yet) !!!

 

 

Brit15

 

 

 

 

[jjb1970]

On 27/01/2024 at 21:53, melmerby said:

It depends

Japan, builder of many High Speed lines (approximately 1800 miles so far) actually introduced a new active tilting trainset last year, obviously not for Shinkansen.

 

Some shinkansen trains tilt, the Series N700S is a tilting train.

[melmerby]

8 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

If the ECML went to 140mph running then I believe it would need all level crossings closed.

It is signalled for 140mph north of Peterborough with a fifth aspect - flashing green, but 140mph running has not been implemented.

[phil-b259]

1 minute ago, melmerby said:

It is signalled for 140mph north of Peterborough with a fifth aspect - flashing green, but 140mph running has not been implemented.

 

 

Trials done during the last few years of British Rail conclusively proved that it was NOT SAFE to use lineside signals at speeds grater than 125mph - drivers simply didn't see them for long enough.

 

As such even though Grantham - Peterborough (NOT the whole ECML north of Peterborough) has flashing green aspects these are treated as bog standard green aspects by drivers who must NEVER exceed 125mph.

 

The flashing greens have not been removed simply because its not worth spending the money amending the huge quantities of drawings + paying for the lineside alterations to return it to a standard 4 aspect installation.

 

Only once ECTS and in cab signalling goes live will anything above 125mph be permitted.

[The Stationmaster]

18 hours ago, DenysW said:

Are there implication on paths if not speed? I thought that full-barriers were interlocked so that trains would stop in time if the barriers failed. This surely is a hit on frequency if not on speed.

Yes and no.  If you increase the line speed (assuming it is permissible to increase it above 125mph where there is a level crossing with full barriers) what you actually do is push the green signal aspect (when the barriers are down) further back in rear of the crossing.  In other words the crossing has to be closed to road traffic and rail signals cleared for a train earlier than would be the case for a lower speed train.

 

But the critical factor which decides where that signal will be is in fact braking distance from maximum permitted speed of the fastest train (we'll forget heavy freights for a moment) and that distance will be no different for a train following another  - it still needs the same stopping distance if the train ahead of it has come to a stand.  Mixing in freights can make a difference depending on their load and brake performance - it might need a greater distance to stop 4,000 tons of freight train than less than 1,000 tons of passenger train.

 

But if you push signals further apart to increase available braking distance to cater for faster trains you can, depending on the mix of trains, reduce line capacity because slower trains need shorter braking distances and signals can be closer together allowing more trans to run on green aspects.  And that comes back to what the signalling specification requires in terms of lne capacity = headway at a stated speed (for a certain type of train).

 

The big problem on a mixed train type/speed etc railway is how you define a path - not that many people bother to think of that because if the line has capacity for the traffic on offer. you don't need to get scientific.  The UIC fiche on line capacity gets very scientific and most UK operators/planners and signal engineers have never heard of it anyway - which is a pity because it's handy source of numbers with which to beat accountants, Civil Servants, and the politicos, round the head when you want to increase total railway capacity;  mainland European railways have been doing that for many decades.

[John Tomlinson]

3 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

From yesterday's Daily Telegraph.....

 

HS2 bosses in talks to scrap first-class seats

Operator considering the step to maintain passenger capacity because of train shortening

 

First-class seats could be removed from HS2 in order to avoid a drop in passenger capacity after Rishi Sunak scrapped the northern leg of the multi-billion-pound project.

The Prime Minister cut back proposals for Britain’s high-speed railway in October because of spiralling costs. 

 

A new railway will still be built between London and Birmingham, but HS2 trains will then be switched to the existing West Coast Mainline track from Birmingham to Manchester.

The revised plans mean there could be a reduction in seats from London to Manchester as HS2 trains are shorter than existing trains that travel along this route, according to an internal government document seen by the Financial Times.

The document suggests capacity could drop from 1,690 to 1,530 seats per hour between London and Manchester.

 

Increased capacity was one of the original aims of HS2.

Three industry and government figures have told the Financial Times that HS2 is now looking at ways to address the fall in seat capacity, although no changes to contracts have yet been made. 

 

One option being considered is scrapping all first-class seats.

A senior rail industry figure told the Financial Times: “They are serious about ripping out first class, it’s another nail in the coffin of this being some kind of superior rail service but it’s probably less embarrassing than ending up with a lower capacity.” 

Another industry executive said that giving up first-class seats would be “another downgrade” for the line and could potentially lower revenues.  

 

The planned extension to the stations in Crewe and to the station at Manchester Piccadilly have been scrapped, meaning HS2 trains travelling beyond Birmingham will have to be shorter than planned. 

Sir Jon Thompson, the project’s chair, told MPs earlier this month that HS2 trains will also be slower than the current Pendolinos because the new trains cannot tilt round bends.

“The HS2 train will go the same as a Pendolino on straight, 125mph, and round the bends it’ll go slower at 115mph.

So an HS2 from Birmingham to Manchester, which of course would be almost entirely the West Coast Mainline, would go slower than the Pendelino, yes,” he said. 

 

HS2 declined to comment.

The Department for Transport said no changes have been made to HS2 contracts. 

A statement said: “The contract to design and build HS2 trains includes both standard and first-class areas for passengers.”

 

 

.

 

Post deleted.

Edited January 28 by John Tomlinson

[jamie92208]

2 minutes ago, John Tomlinson said:

 

Open question for comment.

 

Given this, the non-tilting trains being slower on conventional tracks, and the loss of seating capacity, are we headed for completing

Phase 1 as a conventional 125/140mph line with some kind of Pendos Mk2?

Not unless the Government wants to give Alstom/Hitachi many million to cover variation orders in their Contract. Mind you with the current style of decision making g anything could happen. 

 

Jamie

[John Tomlinson]

1 minute ago, jamie92208 said:

Not unless the Government wants to give Alstom/Hitachi many million to cover variation orders in their Contract. Mind you with the current style of decision making g anything could happen. 

 

Jamie

 

Thanks for the reply.

 

I did delete my post as I remembered that we touched on this a while back, however I don't recall the issue of compensation for work already done. So that's a very useful point.

 

John.

[APOLLO]

Just announced - New HS2 stock. Non tilting, third class only, no toilets, 3+2 seating.

 

Whaw don't they look swish !!!!!

 

 

Brit15

[APOLLO]

The Northern Powerhouse will get these.

 

 

Brit15

 

[corneliuslundie]

Presumably "bring your own umbrella"

J

[St Enodoc]

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

it might need a greater distance to stop 4,000 tons of freight train than less than 1,000 tons of passenger train.

Surely the braking distance must be the same with fixed signals, which is why, everything else being equal, the freight train runs slower than the passenger train?

 

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

The big problem on a mixed train type/speed etc railway is how you define a path - not that many people bother to think of that because if the line has capacity for the traffic on offer. you don't need to get scientific.  

What many people forget is the unusable "white space" between trains running at different speeds and/or with different stopping patterns.

Edited January 28 by St Enodoc
clarity

[adb968008]

How much revenue does 1st class actually produce ?

 

Most of the time ive seen it, its either empty or staff on privs, or politicians.

 

I dont know that many companies that will shell out £500 on a 2 hour train ride for expenses, and tbh the 1st class service is rubbish.. basically its a guaranteed seat in a quiet coach with a free cuppa.

Edited January 29 by adb968008

[St Enodoc]

1 hour ago, adb968008 said:

How much revenue does 1st class actually produce ?

 

Most of the time ive seen it, its either empty or staff on privs, or politicians.

 

I dont know that many companies that will shell out £500 on a 2 hour train ride for expenses, and tbh the 1st class service is rubbish.. basically its a guaranteed seat in a quiet coach with a free cuppa.

I used a 1st class Britrail pass extensively during November and December last year. Every long-distance train I took was full.

[jamie92208]

Florence and Cecilia have reported. Florence is now at 15,962with just 98 metres to go, Cecilia is at 15,391m. I suspect that Florence will break through sometime this week. She has been doing over 24 metres per day recently. 

 

Jamir

[Pete the Elaner]

19 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Only once ECTS and in cab signalling goes live will anything above 125mph be permitted.

 

I am not sure that 140mph running will happen any time soon.

All trains needing to use the line will need to be compliant. Some sections are only 2 tracks. Others are 4 but you cannot just ban non-compliant stock from the fast lines because there may be an issue of some kind on the slow: points or signal failure, land slip, failed train, engineering works. All trains would then need to use the fast lines.

 

While that is possible, what will it really gain?

 

On 4 track sections, the slow lines are too full to take everything but the fastest trains, so allowing a higher top speed would only allow them to catch up with slower trains more quickly, causing them to get checked by double yellows. For a passenger, going slow in a fast train is highly irritating. I expect drivers are equally irritated. It only takes the slightest thing to go wrong & several trains then get delayed. Planners have to conduct an investigation into most delays, so they do not like it either.

 

Running at 140mph puts 25% more energy through the running gear (energy increasing with the square of speed), so increases the wear on trains & rail by 25%.

Increasing maximum speed to 140mph on existing lines therefore requires a lot of investment. Is it really worthwhile? Only the last part about increased energy & therefore maintenance applies to a dedicated line.

[John Tomlinson]

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

I used a 1st class Britrail pass extensively during November and December last year. Every long-distance train I took was full.

 

There is a paradox with our ticket pricing system, that quite often first class can be cheaper than standard, or if not cheaper then similar. My wife for many years used the train to go to see family in Cornwall from our home in the East Midlands, and using the pre-booking system going first paid either a small premium or indeed travelled less expensively than standard. The benefit is the space and single seating, rather than the free tea and coffee.

 

John.

[billbedford]

23 minutes ago, John Tomlinson said:

 

There is a paradox with our ticket pricing system, that quite often first class can be cheaper than standard, or if not cheaper then similar. My wife for many years used the train to go to see family in Cornwall from our home in the East Midlands, and using the pre-booking system going first paid either a small premium or indeed travelled less expensively than standard. The benefit is the space and single seating, rather than the free tea and coffee.

 

Isn't this an admission that not enough people want first-class travel to Cornwall to make the service economic?

[phil-b259]

44 minutes ago, Pete the Elaner said:

 

I am not sure that 140mph running will happen any time soon.

All trains needing to use the line will need to be compliant. Some sections are only 2 tracks. Others are 4 but you cannot just ban non-compliant stock from the fast lines because there may be an issue of some kind on the slow: points or signal failure, land slip, failed train, engineering works. All trains would then need to use the fast lines.

For a number of years now Network Rail have a programme running to make sure an ECTS in cab system is available for every train cab design which will use the ECML. The theory is that because its an infrastructure change train owners shouldn’t bare the cost of developing a solution - but once the solution is proven the train owners will then have to pay to roll it out to the rest of their fleet.

 

This is important as when ECTS is deployed on the ECML ALL lineside signals on ALL LINES and sidings will be REMOVED!

Therefore if a traction unit doesn’t have ECTS it will be banned from working over the sections of the ECML so fitted.

 

Once lineside signals are taken out of the equation the only limitations to 140mph become the track maintenance standard and the railway alignment….

 

 

Edited January 29 by phil-b259

[adb968008]

Theindustry is habitually following airlines when it comes to ticketing, maybe it should consider loyalty and spend…

 

if 1st has spare seating consider upgrades, via points or ticketed fare price paid.

 

I simply dont get 1st class on London metro suburban services… definitely no difference in seating on that, nor any tea /coffee and quite often you find the standard class passengers are using it unpoliced anyway.

[rodent279]

Just catching up with this. Good grief, what an absolute shambles of a farce of a cluster £@#¥ of a country we live in. 

[phil-b259]

52 minutes ago, billbedford said:

 

Isn't this an admission that not enough people want first-class travel to Cornwall to make the service economic?

But there is most likely enough people from Devon.

 

Short of having train interiors which reconfigure themselves on route or adopting a London suburban attitude to 1st class (I.e. where it’s no different to standard) then you will end up carrying surplus first class accommodation into Cornwall anyway.