HS2

[martin_wynne]

A railway should be easy:

 

 

 

 

Edited February 28 by martin_wynne

[jamie92208]

And if you bring the speed down you will need more expensive trains. More drivers and crews and larger and more expensive depots plus possibly bigger stations with more platforms. 

 

Jamie

 

 

[rodent279]

1 hour ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

Capacity is needed for both freight and for local, regional and commuter passenger services.

Building a new line purely for freight would have had zero business case and wouldn't have achieved the objective of releasing sufficient capacity on the classic network.

You would still have had the capacity limitations of mixing slow and semi-fast trains, with 125 or 140 mph expresses.

It's worth bearing in mind that (if I recall correctly) the main justification for the original SNCF LGV between Paris & Lyons was capacity on the classic PLM route, not a burning desire to do that journey in half the time.

[Pete the Elaner]

2 hours ago, GordonC said:

 

If we need capacity for freight then would a 75mph railway have been fast enough and either the new line used for expresses or leave them where they are on the WCML.

 

I have lost count of how many times I have had to explain this. It is very simple too.

 

A freight line would be fast enough but would not achieve anything.

 

Local services serve all local destinations along the route, so cannot be moved.

Freight can run at 75 or 60mph quite comfortably with local services which do 90-0-90-0. They simply catch up a little then the locals accelerate away again. There is no benefit to separating these from the local services.

Semi-fast services can veer a little off but these serve intermediate destinations, so they cannot go too far away from the exiting routes.

Fast services only need to stop at a few primary destinations. At 125mph, it is difficult to plan these with the others. It could leave London 10 minutes behind a semi fast & hit double yellows before the semi pulls over at Ledburn Jcn (Leighton Buzzard) & if that one is delayed even slightly (which is very common because it has to cross the up fast, so these have to be planned very carefully & any delay to either line would cause a conflict), it would cause all others behind it to stop too.

So if there is any 1 class of service which can be moved, then it is the fast ones.

That leaves us with a new line for the faster services & in many places, there is no room to just build a new set of tracks beside the existing ones (Birmingham New St is the best example, but there are others). Why build them to yesterday's technology?

 

[Northmoor]

4 hours ago, locoholic said:

The freight from Daventry to Cardiff goes via Crewe at the moment. Skipton would be no more ridiculous.

That's the exception that proves the rule.  If you want to encourage freight from road to rail, adding several avoidable hours to the journey isn't the way to go about it.

 

To get to Skipton, freight from the South will have to go through Leeds station area, probably even harder to negotiate and schedule than through Manchester.

[4630]

4 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

To get to Skipton, freight from the South will have to go through Leeds station area, probably even harder to negotiate and schedule than through Manchester.

Indeed.  Access onto the single line at Engine Shed Junction at Holbeck…leading to Whitehall curve…and for freight heading north, across the Up and Down Huddersfield and Up and Down Doncaster at Whitehall Junction, which is part of the approach to Leeds station for other services arriving from the south and west.

 

Problematic - paths for scheduled freight do exist using this route - but not conducive to maintaining good time keeping on the other major routes in and out of Leeds 

[mac1960]

Back in the 1960,s the  traffic which was mostly freight over the S&C , moved at night. Indeed some of the signal boxes were unmanned during the daylight hours, but manned at night due to this traffic. As an example Mallerstang, which must have been a lonely walk.  

[locoholic]

1 hour ago, Northmoor said:

That's the exception that proves the rule.  If you want to encourage freight from road to rail, adding several avoidable hours to the journey isn't the way to go about it.

 

To get to Skipton, freight from the South will have to go through Leeds station area, probably even harder to negotiate and schedule than through Manchester.

Daventry to Cardiff via Crewe is very far from being an exception - there are some extremely eccentric routings of freight trains these days.

[APOLLO]

3 minutes ago, locoholic said:

Daventry to Cardiff via Crewe is very far from being an exception - there are some extremely eccentric routings of freight trains these days.

 

This is one

 

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:H43490/2024-02-28/detailed

 

Brit15

[melmerby]

50 minutes ago, locoholic said:

Daventry to Cardiff via Crewe is very far from being an exception - there are some extremely eccentric routings of freight trains these days.

Because of a lack of paths elsewhere

[melmerby]

4 hours ago, Pete the Elaner said:

Fast services only need to stop at a few primary destinations. At 125mph, it is difficult to plan these with the others. It could leave London 10 minutes behind a semi fast & hit double yellows before the semi pulls over at Ledburn Jcn (Leighton Buzzard) & if that one is delayed even slightly (which is very common because it has to cross the up fast, so these have to be planned very carefully & any delay to either line would cause a conflict), it would cause all others behind it to stop too.

The 19:17 (?) Euston to Birmingham class 350 (110mph) used get to Ledburn just in time to clear the crossover for the following Pendo.

If it went smoothly the 350 would have cleared the junctions a few minutes before and the Pendo would shoot past as some speed, if not it would be seen accelerating from a caution.

 

Current timetable is different

[St Enodoc]

7 hours ago, corneliuslundie said:

And of course a faster line has more capacity

Not so. You get more trains per hour past any given point by running them more slowly, with correspondingly shorter braking distances. If each train carries the same payload (passengers or freight) then you can transport more payload per hour with slower trains, at the expense of longer journey times.

[phil-b259]

10 hours ago, St Enodoc said:

Not so. You get more trains per hour past any given point by running them more slowly, with correspondingly shorter braking distances. If each train carries the same payload (passengers or freight) then you can transport more payload per hour with slower trains, at the expense of longer journey times.

But at the price of requiring more trains, which in turn means more depots space to house them, more crew to drive them, more staff to fix them….

 

It also needs to be remembered that there is a environmental need for the sake of the planet for people to use less polluting forms of transport - we all know that a train is not as confident as a motor vehicle which can transport you from door to door, so having trains which are substantially faster than road transport is an important tool in encouraging modal shift.

Edited February 29 by phil-b259

[62613]

On 29/02/2024 at 11:06, phil-b259 said:

But at the price of requiring more trains, which in turn means more depots space to house them, more crew to drive them, more staff to fix them….

 

It also needs to be remembered that there is a environmental need for the sake of the planet for people to use less polluting forms of transport - we all know that a train is not as confident as a motor vehicle which can transport you from door to door, so having trains which are substantially faster than road transport is an important tool in encouraging modal shift.

Short - haul air as well. I think you mean convenient. 

 

My old car recently failed its MOT (I expected it). I seriously considered doing without a car; I don't make that many long journeys in the course of a year (two last year, one so far this) as I'm retired. I have an old fogey's bus pass which in Manchester paying an extra £10, I can get anywgere by bus, train or tram for free, if I'm willing to expend the time. I worked out that the basics for my car were costing me £150 a month, that's a lot of money. If you're on not much more than a state pension. In the end, I bought another as at times it's needed.

Edited March 7 by 62613
phrase after "pension" added

[lmsforever]

Went to Wendover today and after a long  time went via Butlers Cross  as we arrived into Wendover  you come to left hand bend and traffic lights ,on the right there is a very big removal of the embankment and it is now a curved area,On the left you can see clearly the road that will take you around the houses but I cannot see the area where it will come out in Wendoer this looks ready to use .  But where the road will start has not been made ready for connection the Butlers Cross road  this will not take long to  do the work.The line where it goes alongside the bypass is being readied for the next level of work. I 

[lmsforever]

Went to Wendover today and after a long  time went via Butlers Cross  as we arrived into Wendover  you come to left hand bend and traffic lights ,on the right there is a very big removal of the embankment and it is now a curved area,On the left you can see clearly the road that will take you around the houses but I cannot see the area where it will come out in Wendover this looks ready to use .  But where the road will start has not been made ready for connection to the Butlers Cross road  this will not take long to  do the work.The line where it goes alongside the bypass is being readied for the next level of work. I dont think working on HS2 would be for me looking at all the mud !!! 

[melmerby]

37 minutes ago, lmsforever said:

I dont think working on HS2 would be for me looking at all the mud !!! 

The wet winter hasn't helped with some areas looking like they're building Grand Junction Canal 2

[Ron Ron Ron]

Looking at that HS2 in 3 minutes video, showing  just a stretch of the line works, from Wendover to Kenilworth, gives an impression of how much progress should be made over the course of this year.

A lot of the civil engineering structures, bridges, viaducts, flyovers,  water course culverts are well advanced and should be completed by this time next year.

 

Compared with a year ago, earthworks to form the elevations and base of the track formation, are starting to make visible progress on many sections, although at first glance it appears quite random.

However, a lot of the route still looks just like confusing, muddy excavations and huge piles of spoil.

Come the spring and summer, I would expect a significant ramp up in this work.

 

Today I drove up the M42, past the NEC to the M6 Toll and passed through the Delta Junction.

Numerous cranes and piling machines are visible all along the route through this area.

There are long lines of piers for the Delta Junction viaducts, under construction.

That’s a very noticeable difference since I last made that journey, just over a year ago.

 

 

.

 

Edited March 1 by Ron Ron Ron

[figworthy]

Apologies for posting something relevant and on topic.

 

I went into London yesterday on the Chiltern route, and a couple of things were noticeable.  Firstly, the Colne Valley viaduct gantry was still positioned over the arch immediately before (to the west of) the Grand Union canal, so remedial work on that arch still seems to be ongoing.  Secondly, there were several tipper lorries leaving the (rail supplied) stone depot next to Oxford Parkway which had HS2 signs in their windscreens.  I don't know where they were heading for, but at least the stone is doing part of its journey by rail.

 

Adrian

[jamie92208]

A little bit of light relief. 

 

Jamie 

[jamie92208]

A new video of the stretch near the Thame Valley viaduct has just been posted.  The viaduct itself is coming on apace and even appears to have the first decking units  in place though they are obviously having problems with at least one pier foundation. 

Jamie 

[jamie92208]

Florence may have reached her destination but Cecilia is still going strong. 102 metres last week at 15, 967.   93 metres to go.  The other three haven't reported in recently.

 

Jamie

[melmerby]

On 03/03/2024 at 18:03, jamie92208 said:

A new video of the stretch near the Thame Valley viaduct has just been posted.  The viaduct itself is coming on apace and even appears to have the first decking units  in place though they are obviously having problems with at least one pier foundation. 

Jamie 

Shows clearly why the railway needs to be on stilts over that flood plain.

[Ron Ron Ron]

2 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

Florence may have reached her destination but Cecilia is still going strong. 102 metres last week at 15, 967.   93 metres to go.  The other three haven't reported in recently.

 

I’ve read a report that Florence encountered heavy clay on its final run in, over the last 100 or so metres.

Apparently one of the reasons for the slow progress, as the slurry pipes had to be flushed, to prevent blockage and the cutting head adjusted to cope with the change in material it was tunnelling through.

Cecilia will now be in those conditions, if that report is accurate.

Breakthrough is close though.

[Ron Ron Ron]

Re-configured and overhauled TBM “Dorothy”, that dug both bores of the Long Itchington tunnels, has already started its drive on the 2nd bore if the Bromford tunnels.

The new name given to this TBM, is “Elizabeth”.

The TBM has been fitted with a smaller cutting head and shield, for the smaller diameter tunnels being dug on the approaches to Birmingham

 

https://mediacentre.hs2.org.uk/news/the-last-hs2-tunnel-boring-machine-in-the-west-midlands-starts-digging-towards-birmingham

 

 

Unconfirmed reports are suggesting TBM “Emily” has also set off from the Victoria Rd. crossover box, at OOC.

 

 

.