HS2

[jamie92208]

Trying to get back on topic whilst we wait for news of Florence breaking through.  On the LGV's I don't think that any headspans are used on the high speeds portions.  Where there are multiple tracks, portal structures are used. The actual running lines seem to be all  standard single track masts.  However I will have a good look at the junctions at Juillé next time I visit.  Yes there are heads pans on the classic network but only in station and yard areas. 

 

Jamie

Edited February 5 by jamie92208

[corneliuslundie]

Anyone fancy modelling that knitting?

Probably not.

J

[The Stationmaster]

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Look like one of these:

 

https://pixabay.com/photos/diesel-locomotive-nohab-round-nose-1364781/

Definitely a Nohab.  Sometimes called a 'Benelux Nohab or 'Benelux diesel' because of some of the railways that operated them.

[jamie92208]

All the TBM's have reported in today.   Mary Anne, toiling away towards Brum is going slowly but i now 27% of the way to her destination.   Sushila and Caroline and both getting on and Sushila is nearly halfway through that drive. Florence and Cecilia are both continuing.  Florence only has 88 m to go having only done 10 metres this week.  I suspect that are waiting until there is a clear spot in Rishi's diary till they break through.  Cecilia is still going at just under 10 meters per day with 580 to go.

 

Jamie the cynic

[jamie92208]

This has just been posted on Youtube about the approach viaducts to Curzon Street. 

 

Jamie

[melmerby]

On 04/02/2024 at 23:46, melmerby said:

Is that a Danish train?

 

On 05/02/2024 at 00:20, adb968008 said:

Yes..

 

Trier, April 5th 2010…

Long way from Denmark!

Running in preservation?

[adb968008]

2 hours ago, melmerby said:

 

Long way from Denmark!

Running in preservation?

Oh yes, 175th anniversary of German railways, in 2010, 14 steam locos on the mainline as a 4 day plandampf.. 1000 movements on 120 service trains a day from 5am until midnight, a few diesels / electrics in supporting roles etc…. The most knackering event ive ever done, but by far the most enjoyable… highlight was day 3 afternoon when compounded with delays there was no less than 7 steam hauled service trains in the platform and environs of Trier station to/from Saarbrucken, Cochem, Bullay, Gerolstein, Koln, Wellen, Koblenz, Luxembourg they just kept coming.

Edited February 6 by adb968008

[John Tomlinson]

16 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Oh yes, 175th anniversary of German railways, in 2010, 14 steam locos on the mainline as a 4 day plandampf.. 1000 movements on 120 service trains a day from 5am until midnight, a few diesels / electrics in supporting roles etc…. The most knackering event ive ever done, but by far the most enjoyable… highlight was day 3 afternoon when compounded with delays there was no less than 7 steam hauled service trains in the platform and environs of Trier station to/from Saarbrucken, Cochem, Bullay, Gerolstein, Koln, Wellen, Koblenz, Luxembourg they just kept coming.

 

IIRC several of the Nohab diesels were leased to private operators in Germany around this time. They were in several different liveries, this being an older DSB scheme.

 

I think this is one of them, someone must have had the bright idea that it would have been a welcome guest at the event you visited. I'm sure it was!

 

John.

[John Tomlinson]

A piece from the BBC website today,   https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68217031

 

John.

[griffgriff]

I hear on the BBC news this evening of ‘warmed up’ leftovers being suggested; a conventional (rather than HS) line running on the planned alignment of HS2 using the land already purchased. 
 

Griff

[GordonC]

1 hour ago, griffgriff said:

I hear on the BBC news this evening of ‘warmed up’ leftovers being suggested; a conventional (rather than HS) line running on the planned alignment of HS2 using the land already purchased. 
 

Griff

 

it'd be interesting to know whether that could be built any cheaper and if so what the difference would be

 

[Ron Ron Ron]

3 minutes ago, GordonC said:

 

it'd be interesting to know whether that could be built any cheaper and if so what the difference would be

 

 

There would be little to no savings as all the civil engineering and infrastructure would still have to be built, all the "mitigation" for this that and the other would still be insisted on and the environmental and nature ad-ons would almost certainly be kept.

 

On the other hand, the idea of a "conventional line" that would be for the exclusive use of HS2 trains, that coincidentally allowed running at errmm, "higher speeds", might be worth floating.

 

.

[mac1960]

2 hours ago, griffgriff said:

I hear on the BBC news this evening of ‘warmed up’ leftovers being suggested; a conventional (rather than HS) line running on the planned alignment of HS2 using the land already purchased. 
 

Griff

Griffgriff

The Dutch have built a new freight line from Rotterdam to the German border to free up paths,  perhaps doing up GC for similar use would have created those paths required at a fraction of the cost of HS2. Capital projects in UK seem permanently blighted.

 

Mac

[Northmoor]

4 minutes ago, mac1960 said:

Griffgriff

The Dutch have built a new freight line from Rotterdam to the German border to free up paths,  perhaps doing up GC for similar use would have created those paths required at a fraction of the cost of HS2. Capital projects in UK seem permanently blighted.

 

Mac

1. The 1990s proposal to reopen the GC as a freight line was scuppered by almost as many Chiltern MPs as have protested against HS2, and it was a private project so they couldn't even complain about the cost to the taxpayer.

2. Removing a few intermodals per hour will not create anywhere near the extra WCML capacity that removing a dozen or more 125mph express services will do.

3. The difference in cost between building a completely new railway to modern standards and resurrecting an old railway formation - which has been lying derelict for over half a century - to the same modern standards, is surprisingly small.  Look at what it cost (compared to the original budget) to re-open the Waverley Route to Tweedbank and consider that a significant length of that line is single track, so actually has less capacity than the original formation was capable of carrying.

[rodent279]

Since a lot of  WCML freight runs at night I don't think it would make much difference, and reopening the GC after nearly 60 years would not be much cheaper. 

[rodent279]

3 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

3. The difference in cost between building a completely new railway to modern standards and resurrecting an old railway formation - which has been lying derelict for over half a century - to the same modern standards, is surprisingly small.  Look at what it cost (compared to the original budget) to re-open the Waverley Route to Tweedbank and consider that a significant length of that line is single track, so actually has less capacity than the original formation was capable of carrying.

This point has been made time and again-reopening a long closed railway is effectively building a new railway. The idea that just because an old railway route can be traced in Google maps, means it's a simple case of throw some track down and off you go, is for the birds.

Edited February 7 by rodent279

[62613]

9 hours ago, John Tomlinson said:

A piece from the BBC website today,   https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68217031

 

John.

Given the way that the project has been kneecapped by two of the last three governments (the second didn't get a chance, it only lasted 49 days), should that really be a surprise?

[62613]

17 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

1. The 1990s proposal to reopen the GC as a freight line was scuppered by almost as many Chiltern MPs as have protested against HS2, and it was a private project so they couldn't even complain about the cost to the taxpayer.

2. Removing a few intermodals per hour will not create anywhere near the extra WCML capacity that removing a dozen or more 125mph express services will do.

3. The difference in cost between building a completely new railway to modern standards and resurrecting an old railway formation - which has been lying derelict for over half a century - to the same modern standards, is surprisingly small.  Look at what it cost (compared to the original budget) to re-open the Waverley Route to Tweedbank and consider that a significant length of that line is single track, so actually has less capacity than the original formation was capable of carrying.

Not to mention the need to demolish structures built on the old formation, and to evict two preserved railways!

[DenysW]

14 minutes ago, rodent279 said:

The idea that just because an old railway route can be traced in Google maps, means it's a simple case of throw some track down and off you go, is for the birds.

Although I only 80% agree with this*, what I think scuppers the revive-the GCR-route is that it doesn't get you from Rugby to London on an abandoned, part-built-over route, it gets you to Calvert (or the place in the middle of rural Chilterns where HS2 has demolished the old route.). The GCR/Met and the GCR/GWR route from Calvert (or near offer) into London is still used. You then have the problem of how to get into London at acceptable cost and acceptable over-riding of NIMBYism. Back to HS2 costs and routes! You wouldn't annoy the heritage lines in north-Leicestershre/South Nottinghamshire because they are well away from the bottleneck on the WCML.

 

*Despite noting that it carries the assumption that Victorian-era  design train-speeds and level-crossing frequencies are still abso-blooming-lutely fine.

[jamie92208]

One of the saddest things in all this is that Phase 2a was going to be much cheaper to build per mile than phase 1. This was due to no tunnelling and much lower property and land prices. 

 

Jamie

Edited February 8 by jamie92208

[locoholic]

Andy Burnham has, quite understandably, been complaining that the HS2 Manchester trains will now have fewer seats than the current WCML service and be slower, because the HS2 trains won't be able to tilt north of Handsacre Junction. Is there any reason why tilting HS2 trains can't be ordered for destinations north of Handsacre, perhaps running on HS2 itself with the tilt mechanism switched off?

[Ron Ron Ron]

3 minutes ago, locoholic said:

Andy Burnham has, quite understandably, been complaining that the HS2 Manchester trains will now have fewer seats than the current WCML service and be slower, because the HS2 trains won't be able to tilt north of Handsacre Junction. Is there any reason why tilting HS2 trains can't be ordered for destinations north of Handsacre, perhaps running on HS2 itself with the tilt mechanism switched off?

 

The trains have already been ordered to a specification issued before the cancellation of 2a.

 

 

In any case, I doubt there would be much of a time penalty resulting from any minor speed reduction on the stretches of track between Handsacre and Crewe (or Piccadilly), where 125 mph running depends on tilt.

 

Handsacre to Crewe is only something like 32 miles after all.

How much of that mileage needs tilt and would be affected?

 

The time saving resulting from running on HS2 Phase 1, would more than make up for it.

 

Sounds like a total Red Herring to me.

More concerning is the passenger capacity issue.

 

 

.

 

 

.

Edited February 7 by Ron Ron Ron

[Hesperus]

The speed isn't really an issue up to Manchester but will be for trains heading further north.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/07/mayors-put-forward-alternatives-to-hs2-scrapped-northern-section

 

This article said 3 options had been put forward by the 2 Andy's, does anyone have a link to what they are as I can't find it?

 

I completely agree that doing nothing isn't an option.  Whether you think building HS2 was a good idea or not, building a third of it, spending most of the money and spoiling the pretty bits of landscape to be left with something that only really helps people get from Birmingham to Heathrow quicker isn't a good use of money.

 

 

[melmerby]

3 minutes ago, Hesperus said:

The speed isn't really an issue up to Manchester but will be for trains heading further north.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/feb/07/mayors-put-forward-alternatives-to-hs2-scrapped-northern-section

 

This article said 3 options had been put forward by the 2 Andy's, does anyone have a link to what they are as I can't find it?

 

 

 

 

I heard the interview on Midlands Today

If I can recall correctly the gist is:

 

One, was a new lower speed version of the planned HS2 route, which they say, according to the HS2 designers, would be somewhat less cost.

Two, some upgrades to the present route by bypassing the bottlenecks with new tracks.

Three, something in between.

 

I assume, Apart from the first one, the trains would still be restricted in length and hence capacity

 

Getting private investment was considered crucial.

 

Still doesn't solve the Euston debacle, which from what we can see the private sector isn't interested in.

[jamie92208]

However as has been pointed out before, all those alternatives would require, either a new Transport and works order or a new Parliamentary bill. New environmental assessment, consultation, etc etc.  They wouldn't be able to put a shovel in the ground for 7 to 10 years.  They could start phase 2a tomorrow. 

 

Jamie

Edited February 8 by jamie92208