Jump to content
Image restoration from pre-May 2021 continues and may take an indefinite period of time.

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Not if you swap out the battery for a freshly recharged one. That would take no longer than stopping for petrol. It would surely make sense to treat car batteries the same way as Calor gas bottles -- take back the empty one and get a re-filled one.

 

It needs an interchangeable design of car battery, and a lot more infrastructure at "filling stations" to drive over the robot machine which changes the battery. But recharging a battery while you wait makes no sense in the middle of a journey.

 

Sorry if this starts yet another off-topic diversion. :)

 

Martin.

 

A Captain Mainwaring quote springs to mind.

 

 

Edited by DY444
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, woodenhead said:

I note the the Government are looking at a 2-3 minute saving by moving the Golborne Junction with HS2b, I imagine unless there are other economic factors i.e. it's cheaper, then I doubt they will be making massive changes to the link with HS2 south of Preston.  Once past Preston, what is the point in a high speed line when the only trains beyond Carnforth are going to be express trains or high speed intermodals, at worst a few more loops would give greater capacity and kill any feasibility for another line north.

 

Interesting - Where can they move it to to save 2-3 minutes ? Certainly not further south - a very sharp bend exists a couple of miles further south, then it's two tracks to Winwick. Further north than the current proposed junction site just south of Bamfurlong would mean by passing Wigan (as I discussed in an earlier thread). Viable as the route exists, but expensive.

 

The more I look at this the more I think Boris's new plans are drawn on the back of a fag packet with a thick marker pen. At least the old route had detailed published plans instantly available. It's all talk at the moment apart from the work in progress to Birmingham, which I think is all we will get.

 

The end of tilting trains Preston - Glasgow will be a retrograde step akin to the scrapping of Concord. Straightening out the many, many curves just won't happen due to the mega expense.

 

We as a nation are skint.

 

Brit15

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, APOLLO said:

 

The end of tilting trains Preston - Glasgow will be a retrograde step akin to the scrapping of Concord. Straightening out the many, many curves just won't happen due to the mega expense.

 

We as a nation are skint.

But if you follow previous Trans Pennine practice and half the number of tracks, you can ease your curves significantly. :lol:

  • Like 1
  • Funny 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

 

Interesting - Where can they move it to to save 2-3 minutes ? Certainly not further south - a very sharp bend exists a couple of miles further south, then it's two tracks to Winwick. Further north than the current proposed junction site just south of Bamfurlong would mean by passing Wigan (as I discussed in an earlier thread). Viable as the route exists, but expensive.

 

I am sure that missing Wigan was actually mentioned somewhere, so the saving is really just not stopping at Wigan!

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

Interesting - Where can they move it to to save 2-3 minutes ? Certainly not further south ......

 

 

The review talks of further north, closer to Preston.

 

4 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

.....The more I look at this the more I think Boris's new plans are drawn on the back of a fag packet with a thick marker pen. ......

 

Nothing to do with Boris. This has all come from Sir Peter Hendy's report.

 

5 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

.......It's all talk at the moment apart from the work in progress to Birmingham, which I think is all we will get.....

 

Phase 2a to Crewe was approved long ago and preliminary work has started, with the advanced civil work due to start in a years time.

It's gone too far to be called off at this stage.

 

Phase 2b to Manchester etc, although formally announced last week, needs parliamentary approval.

Considering the backlash from cancelling the eastern leg of 2b, cancelling this section will be very damaging for this government or its successors.

 

9 minutes ago, APOLLO said:

....We as a nation are skint.......

 

We are, but a lot of "stuff" has to be done, including national infrastructure improvements, otherwise we'll be in deeper doo-doo.

 

 

.

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Living at the side of the WCML just to the north of Wigan (on the 2 track bit) I see 3 options extending HS2 to somewhere between Wigan & Preston.

 

1. Upgrade current route. Feasible but the bends at Wigan NW are sharp(ish) and it's also virtually town centre here. Lots of residential property (me !!!) lineside both sides for a mile or two out of Wigan going north, mostly on an embankment up to Boars Head. Easy from there, straight, little property and from Standish a four track alignment exists.

 

2. New route to the west. Very difficult due to terrain, property, Douglas Valley etc. I suppose it COULD follow the M6 motorway, straight through Heinz bean factory at Kitt Green - THEN what will we eat !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

3. New route to the east - Existing proposal along the old GC route and onto the Whelley loop allignment seems possible. Any further east and its very hilly & awkward indeed.

 

I really hope it ALL gets built, but like everything Government related these days -----------

 

Brit15

  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Not if you swap out the battery for a freshly recharged one. That would take no longer than stopping for petrol. It would surely make sense to treat car batteries the same way as Calor gas bottles -- take back the empty one and get a re-filled one.

 

It needs an interchangeable design of car battery, and a lot more infrastructure at "filling stations" to drive over the robot machine which changes the battery. But recharging a battery while you wait makes no sense in the middle of a journey.

 

 

 

Martin.

Exactly as I said sometime back in the EV topic.

You rent a battery and pay a fixed amount per year to cover charging with different plans for different users.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Not if you swap out the battery for a freshly recharged one. That would take no longer than stopping for petrol. It would surely make sense to treat car batteries the same way as Calor gas bottles -- take back the empty one and get a re-filled one.

 

It needs an interchangeable design of car battery, and a lot more infrastructure at "filling stations" to drive over the robot machine which changes the battery. But recharging a battery while you wait makes no sense in the middle of a journey.

 

 

This has been done and demonstrated by Tesla a few years ago, in fact they could automatically change two batteries in the time it took to refuel a comparable ICE car.

 

But it will never happen, at least on a wider market as there are just too many different configurations of battery/floorpan/vehicle size.  In a few years, really a few years a recharge will take ten minutes or so and give you 200 miles, if you need more than that faster you need to be flying :D

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

A temporary scar across the landscape is emerging and slowly growing as HS2 earthworks and civil engineering projects gather pace.

 

These 2 back to back videos show views of adjoining sections of the line in the Coventry - Kenilworth Gap up to Burton Green, where preparations are being made to dig a tunnel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

Interesting - Where can they move it to to save 2-3 minutes ? Certainly not further south - a very sharp bend exists a couple of miles further south, then it's two tracks to Winwick. Further north than the current proposed junction site just south of Bamfurlong would mean by passing Wigan (as I discussed in an earlier thread). Viable as the route exists, but expensive.

 

The more I look at this the more I think Boris's new plans are drawn on the back of a fag packet with a thick marker pen. At least the old route had detailed published plans instantly available. It's all talk at the moment apart from the work in progress to Birmingham, which I think is all we will get.

 

The end of tilting trains Preston - Glasgow will be a retrograde step akin to the scrapping of Concord. Straightening out the many, many curves just won't happen due to the mega expense.

 

We as a nation are skint.

 

Brit15

 

 

The Union Connectivity Review was suggesting that moving the connection north towards Preston could save a couple of minute. To me the marginal improvement calls into question the merits of a longer connection to somewhere near Preston - unless there's a meaningful capacity issue it could solve.

 

I call into sharp question the "Britain is broke " argument, since none of this is scheduled to start construction until about 2035. Whether we will still be broke in 10-15 years time must be doubtful.

 

I think that Phase 2a Birmingham/Crewe is now "locked and loaded", and the Government will be fully committed by the time of the next election. Likewise I expect MML electrification to be happening on the ground by 2024 , though probably not live even to Nottingham

 

Phase 2b West and East are not supposed to start construction for at least a dozen years (and never were), and nor is Northern Powerhouse Rail (though the wires may reach Leeds from Manchester by 2030). There's a clear signal in the time line pages at the back of the Review that HS2 Crewe - Manchester Piccadilly is the first cab off the rank as far as the second round schemes are concerned

 

The only other major scheme that we can expect to start construction before 2030 is the proposed West Yorks Mass Transit - which might incorporate one or more local lines currently feeding into Leeds City

 

 

Edited by Ravenser
  • Like 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

 

The problem is that once you get from London to Manchester, all the business case for HS rail has been exhausted, as clearly laid out by NR in their study that spawned the HS2 project.

 

 

It would be difficult to justify the enormous additional cost, for what is a relatively tiny proportion of the UK rail market.

I haven't looked at recent, pre-Covid passenger stats, but less than 10 years ago, the London & the SE of England to Scotland market, represented something like 0.2% of all rail journeys.

 

 

.

 

 

 

Even with Pendolinos cutting London /Glasgow to around 4 hrs , rail has barely 30% market share. 10 years ago it will have been rather slower, and a significantly lower market share still.

 

Go to 3 hrs , and that goes up to around 70% market share. (table in Union Connectivity Review) . You could treble the London/Clydeside rail market.

 

And there ought to be a reasonable market for Glasgow to Liverpool/Manchester. In steam days there were expresses serving this , but WCML electrification killed this - firstly by disrupting the route with slow diversions via the S&C and then because a change of engine was needed at Preston. The traffic was lost to road. Now there are all-electric route to both, a bargain basement service using (I think) 360s has resumed. Upgraded with proper stock (eg cascaded Pendolinos)  this could generate meaningful additional traffic.

 

Two generations ago Barrow on Furness and Windermere  had mainline expresses to Euston. Now Blackpool is wired, and has regained its mainline service to Euston, surely Barrow must be next?

 

There is limited traffic north of Preston because for a generation and a half the railway has offered a poor and uncompetitive service and has lost the bulk of the traffic. Provide a decent product and you might easilyt double , perhaps even triple the traffic

 

I don't expect full-on high-speed lines north of Lancaster . The question is what could be done to upgrade an 80-110 mph railway into a 100-140mph route

 

My opening bid, as a non-engineer . If we are talking spending telephone numbers, I propose the Shap Base Tunnel.

 

The worst length of chewed string on the northern half of the WCML seems to be the southern approach to Shap, presumably the only way Joseph Locke could keep the ruling grade at around 1 in 75 in that terrain. I propose a double track tunnel, engineered for 125 mph, leaving the current route to the north of Shap summit (say around Shap station site) , falling at about 1 in 90 to rejoin the existing route near Tebay . As you are tunneling, a fairly straight route is possible, regardless of terrain. Raising line limit from the present 85 mph at Shap to 125 mph over 5-7 miles ought to generate a useful saving - this is one of the most severe restrictions on the northern part of the WCML and you no longer have to decelerate and accelerate.

 

You might retain the existing route for freight if a 4 track section is useful for capacity and regulation. Intermodals running as Class 4 don't exceed 75mph ; running as Class 6 they are restricted to 60mph . The speed restrictions over Shap on the current route do not therefore affect them

 

After St Pancras -Stratford, Stratford - Rainham, the Thames Tunnel, Euston Old Oak, Old Oak-Chiltern and Chiltern Tunnels , a 5-8 mile tunnel in the Lake District is perfectly routine railway engineering

Edited by Ravenser
  • Like 2
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
  • Interesting/Thought-provoking 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRCShap was only ever meant to be a temporary alignment. The original surveys, that I thnk, Stephenson was involved with, left the current route at Oxenholme then went up the Kent valley to a tunnel before rejoi ing the current route somewhere near Shap village.  Obviously this would have cost rather more so it was put off till later.

 

Jamie

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Even with Pendolinos cutting London /Glasgow to around 4 hrs , rail has barely 30% market share. 10 years ago it will have been rather slower, and a significantly lower market share still...........

 

 

The figures I was referring to were from somewhere between 2011 and 2014. ( i.e. up to 10 years ago....max)

 

The Pendolinos were introduced getting on for 20 years ago, not in the last 10 years.

Most of the line speed improvements were delivered between 2004 and 2008, by the WCML Modernisation programme and subsequent enhancements, such as the Trent Valley quadrupling, further track improvements and various major station remodelling programmes.

Virgin's Very High Frequency (VHF) timetable was subsequently introduced in 2008 - 13 years ago.

Over the last decade, Norton Bridge, Watford and some renewals have delivered minor reductions in journey times and have been more about capacity and resilience.

 

It is true that the London & SE - Scotland market has grown considerably over the last 10 years, up to the pandemic, but that has been in line with overall rail passenger growth.

It still represents a small (much less than 1%) proportion of the overall rail market.

The point was that a new dedicated HS extension beyond HS2 from Lancashire to Scotland, would not realise the larger network, or economic benefits that HS2 will.

The enormous cost would be disproportionate to the return and that scale of investment would be better directed elsewhere.

 

The far more effective path, would be significant upgrades and enhancements to the existing route, including new stretches of track, new infrastructure, such as tunnels etc, new loops, quadrupling and various easements and grade separation schemes.

 

.

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
  • Round of applause 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ravenser said:

And there ought to be a reasonable market for Glasgow to Liverpool/Manchester. In steam days there were expresses serving this , but WCML electrification killed this - firstly by disrupting the route with slow diversions via the S&C and then because a change of engine was needed at Preston. The traffic was lost to road. Now there are all-electric route to both, a bargain basement service using (I think) 360s has resumed. Upgraded with proper stock (eg cascaded Pendolinos)  this could generate meaningful additional traffic.

Didn't the Liverpool / Manchesters split anyway at Preston, so there was always a change in traction.  Later on they became part of the BR Cross Country services so passed through Manchester rather than originated or terminated with the Liverpool portion scrapped.

 

TPE now provide this service, from Liverpool there are currently two direct departures to Glasgow, but just a single return.  From Manchester there are three trains a day to Glasgow and eight to Edinburgh plus returns.  These trains use the Nova 2 class 397 all electric trains, rather sleek looking units.

 

9 hours ago, Ravenser said:

Two generations ago Barrow on Furness and Windermere  had mainline expresses to Euston. Now Blackpool is wired, and has regained its mainline service to Euston, surely Barrow must be next?

 

There is limited traffic north of Preston because for a generation and a half the railway has offered a poor and uncompetitive service and has lost the bulk of the traffic. Provide a decent product and you might easilyt double , perhaps even triple the traffic

 

Barrow is a backwater now and the other stations are too small for anything larger than a four car unit.  Battery/hydrogen is the future for Cumbrian services.

 

There is plenty of room along the WCML to increase capacity when needed, I was watching a cab ride from Preston, for a good chunk of the route departing Preston it used to be four tracks and a most of the bridges are still wide enough.  Plenty of countryside for more four tracking too further north.  It's just a question of under or over Shap, by the sounds of things I think they would prefer over with some works to ease curves, the gradient isn't much of an issue these days.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, billbedford said:

 

Battery/hydrogen units will last just as long as the subsidies do. 

 

It's subsidised now, so not much difference.

 

There's usually a very good reason why some places have become the back end of nowhere.........because they are.

No amount of restoring mainline express rail services, or "levelling up" will alter that.

 

 

 

.

  • Agree 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

People use the Barrow service for three main reasons - to get to Lancaster, to get to school or to get to Manchester Airport.  That was my experience over 4 years of regular travel there by train.  Generally on a three car 185, I could claim a table seat too unless it was high summer and everyone was travelling to the airport.

  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, APOLLO said:

 

 

 

The more I look at this the more I think Boris's new plans are drawn on the back of a fag packet with a thick marker pen. At least the old route had detailed published plans instantly available. It's all talk at the moment apart from the work in progress to Birmingham, CREWE which I think is all we will get.

 

 

 

While most of the plans certainly appear to be underdeveloped - you cannot say that about the section up to Crewe! Going as far as Crewe is therefore a easy (and relatively cheap) win - with the necessary legislation already  / progressing through the Westminster legislative system.

Edited by phil-b259
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that Barrow has no real industry to speak of, you are right that there is no big settlement likely to generate significant traffic.

However, my sister (currently mayor) tells me that at Grange over Sands there is likely to be a beach again in the not too distant future as the river is on the move again.  So perhaps more holiday traffic (though I would hate to see it become like Blackpool). She also put a lot of work into the recent Furness Railway celebrations, including getting the big railway photos now on display in the town  sponsored.

But rather a long way off HS2, so sorry for yet another deviation.

In fact I feel that other than ron ron ron reporting progress from time to time there is not a lot more worth saying on the topic. We can talk about "what if" for ever, and some of us won't live long enough to see the "promised" future wonders.

Jonathan

  • Like 3
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

HS2 pioneers UK-first ‘box-slide’ bridge over the M42 in North Warwickshire

 

https://mediacentre.hs2.org.uk/news/hs2-pioneers-uk-first-box-slide-bridge-over-the-m42-in-north-warwickshire

 

This bridge is being built near to J9 of the M42, on the line to Crewe.

 

The first motorway closure, for preparatory work, is this Xmas & NY  (in just a months time).

Construction will take place throughout 2022 with the bridge deck being slid into place at the end of the year (next winter).

 

 

 

6fac1680c85f472abc41cef3b87fb857.jpg?wid

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

  • Like 3
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Ron Ron Ron said:

HS2 pioneers UK-first ‘box-slide’ bridge over the M42 in North Warwickshire

 

Wasn't a similar method used on the Severn Valley Railway in 1986 for the bridge over the Bewdley by-pass?

 

Bewdley_bypass_MB1.jpg

 

 https://www.svrwiki.com/Bewdley_Bypass_Bridge

 

Martin.

Edited by martin_wynne
pic linked
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Wasn't a similar method used on the Severn Valley Railway for the bridge over the Bewdley by-pass in 1986?

 

 https://www.svrwiki.com/Bewdley_Bypass_Bridge

 

Martin.

 

I think this is a different method.

I may be wrong.

 

According to the article, the technique isn't new and has been used before on rail bridges, but this is the first time over a major trunk road or motorway.

 

Quote

 "....The 10,000 tonne bridge ‘box’ structure has a base, three walls and top slab and will be built on land next to the motorway.

 

Once built, a hi-tech raft will then glide it into position.

Whilst this technology is used on railways, this will be the first box slide of its kind over a motorway in the UK......"

 

 

 

.

Edited by Ron Ron Ron
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Informative/Useful 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...