Fantasy station/line/route re-openings and other projects

[HSTEd]

Well it's a good job that it isn't too late then.

Yay!

I propose a mesh-style network of Shinkansen-esque high speed lines where all trains are composed of 400m double decker units for ~1300+ seats.

95% of the population with 30km of a station with atleast a clockface half-hourly service.

 

[The Ham]

Yay!

I propose a mesh-style network of Shinkansen-esque high speed lines where all trains are composed of 400m double decker units for ~1300+ seats.

95% of the population with 30km of a station with atleast a clockface half-hourly service.

sounds good

 

[30mog]

Yay!

I propose a mesh-style network of Shinkansen-esque high speed lines where all trains are composed of 400m double decker units for ~1300+ seats.

95% of the population with 30km of a station with atleast a clockface half-hourly service.

Unless an oil sheikh with a secret passion for trains dies soon leaving his £240bn estate to Network Rail. It's about as realistic a possibility as a 7 line metro system with a flat fare of 5p being built for Morecambe!

 

[HSTEd]

Unless an oil sheikh with a secret passion for trains dies soon leaving his £240bn estate to Network Rail. It's about as realistic a possibility as a 7 line metro system with a flat fare of 5p being built for Morecambe!

You would probably need a similar amount of High Speed railway to the current motorway network to get to such levels.... which is not really that much considering the Motorway network is only 2176 miles.

Once all the currently under construction stuff is completed in Spain, it will have a longer network than that (it is already up to 1300 miles in operation).

240bn would pay for 8 HS2s.... when most of the network would be in far easier terrain than the south east.... (Note how the 80 miles from East of Leeds to the vicinity of Newcastle is projected at ~£4.5bn by HS2 Ltd.... taking us to ~£150bn for 2300 miles)....


And even £240bn would be peanuts compared to the size of the UK economy considering the effect it would have on it.

 

[StupidQuestion]

You would probably need a similar amount of High Speed railway to the current motorway network to get to such levels.... which is not really that much considering the Motorway network is only 2176 miles.

Once all the currently under construction stuff is completed in Spain, it will have a longer network than that (it is already up to 1300 miles in operation).

240bn would pay for 8 HS2s.... when most of the network would be in far easier terrain than the south east.... (Note how the 80 miles from East of Leeds to the vicinity of Newcastle is projected at ~£4.5bn by HS2 Ltd.... taking us to ~£150bn for 2300 miles)....


And even £240bn would be peanuts compared to the size of the UK economy considering the effect it would have on it.

Sounds excellent HSTEd. In what order would you build the network? HS2 first? and then to Scotland maybe but what after that?

 

[martinsh]

How about a curve on the green belt NW of Tamworth station?

With a running journey time about 48 mins from Sheffield. Express trains could curve left onto WCML and carry on to to Euston.

You are describing a link NE of Tamworth station !

This link was actually partially built, but never opened - you can see it easily on Google maps.

 

[HSTEd]

Sounds excellent HSTEd. In what order would you build the network? HS2 first? and then to Scotland maybe but what after that?

To start with

1. HS2
2. Leeds-Newcastle-Scotland
3. London-Reading-Oxford-Birmingham
4. Wigan-Liverpool
5. Reading-Bristol-Cornwall
6. Bristol-South Wales
7. London-Brighton/Southampton
8. Southampton-Weymouth
9. Manchester-Leeds

and then add additional lines depending on how demand transfers occur and what loadings remain on the conventional network.

 

[RichmondCommu]

How about a curve on the green belt NW of Tamworth station?

With a running journey time about 48 mins from Sheffield. Express trains could curve left onto WCML and carry on to to Euston. 2 hours 7 minutes just like the MML should be possible?

What use will this be when by 2014 Sheffield to London will be achieved in less than two hours?

But most of all, I would use it even if it was a bit slower than going to St.Pancras because St.P has since Eurostar gone from being the best London terminus to the worst. I know HS1 had to end somewhere in London though. All those stupid overpriced shops to suit no one from an everyday life we know. Only place to get a drink a champagne bar charging £50 a spoonful. The old St.P was ample if not great and likeable for being a quieter entrance to London. St.P really does make me p*k*!

Oh don't be so ridiculous! How do you define "everyday life" and who is "we". Those shops and businesses wouldn't be there if they weren't making enough turnover to record a profit. I can't ever recall having a spoonful of Champagne. Nobody is forcing you to patronise these businesses and the renovation of St Pancras is nothing short of fantastic.

 

[LE Greys]

To start with

1. HS2
2. Leeds-Newcastle-Scotland
3. London-Reading-Oxford-Birmingham
4. Wigan-Liverpool
5. Reading-Bristol-Cornwall
6. Bristol-South Wales
7. London-Brighton/Southampton
8. Southampton-Weymouth
9. Manchester-Leeds

and then add additional lines depending on how demand transfers occur and what loadings remain on the conventional network.

We will definitely need a York/Leeds-Peterborough-Stansted-Stratford section about half-way through this, because HS2 will be getting overcrowded by then, and it would close a gaping hole in the network. There's the potential for a Stansted-Norwich section as well, although I'm not sure there would be enough demand without including Ipswich, which leaves a decidedly S-shaped line. Branches (or upgraded classic lines) could extend into Lincolnshire and the East Riding.

Speaking of holes in the network, I would like to do something about the 'railway deserts' of North Devon/Cornwall, North Norfolk (E-W line) the northern Pennines, the Great Glen and East Lincolnshire (plus any others you can think of).

 

[Eagle]

2. Leeds-Newcastle-Scotland

Which of course I assume includes a line to Perth, Dundee and Aberdeen (allowing high-speed services from Edinburgh and Glasgow as well as from England)...

 

[HSTEd]

We will definitely need a York/Leeds-Peterborough-Stansted-Stratford section about half-way through this, because HS2 will be getting overcrowded by then, and it would close a gaping hole in the network.

I am not sure about the eastern route, but you certainly need to reinforce capacity over the HS2 "core", hence my choice of a route to Birmingham via Oxford.
A further east route would probably be better run between London and Nottingham through the midlands than a further east route.
There simply isn't enough population otherwise. (Although you could make an argument for London-Cambridge-Peterborough-Nottingham).

There's the potential for a Stansted-Norwich section as well, although I'm not sure there would be enough demand without including Ipswich, which leaves a decidedly S-shaped line. Branches (or upgraded classic lines) could extend into Lincolnshire and the East Riding.

An LCPN route could tie in with a Norwich-Cambridge-Oxford line, which would provide that whole "varsity interconnectivity" thing, since a fast train could do Oxford-Cambridge in less than half an hour.

A branch to Lincoln would probably be a reasonable investment as the terrain is flat and there is ample railway land adjacent to the existing station for the big new platforms that are required.

Which of course I assume includes a line to Perth, Dundee and Aberdeen (allowing high-speed services from Edinburgh and Glasgow as well as from England)...

Well the 95% population objective probably wouldn't require it with careful laying out of the South Wales and North Wales lines....

But you might be able to assemble a case for a high speed line to Aberdeen... although it might end up being single track north of the Forth, although attempting that with 250kph dynamic loops would be.... interesting.

 

[ValleyLines142]

I propose for a station between Cardiff and Pontyclun!

And also Cardiff and Newport (although only a stopping service like the Cheltenhams or Ebbw Vales, not Londons or Manchesters).

 

[LE Greys]

I am not sure about the eastern route, but you certainly need to reinforce capacity over the HS2 "core", hence my choice of a route to Birmingham via Oxford.
A further east route would probably be better run between London and Nottingham through the midlands than a further east route.
There simply isn't enough population otherwise. (Although you could make an argument for London-Cambridge-Peterborough-Nottingham).

As you probably know from the HS2 thread, I'm extremely concerned about hanging Doncaster out to dry. The Nottingham route might be an acceptable compromise, it doesn't deviate too far west of the direct line between Peterborough and Leeds. It's probably possible to serve the Towns Line stations by coming off the route at Peterborough (my ideas propose making use of the St Ives branch to allow access to the ECML, and a new station in Peterborough directly alongside the old one). The main priority, though, would be to achieve a 2-hour London-Edinburgh time and a 4-hour Paris-Edinburgh time, bringing at least Newcastle into 'day-return' range of Paris.

An LCPN route could tie in with a Norwich-Cambridge-Oxford line, which would provide that whole "varsity interconnectivity" thing, since a fast train could do Oxford-Cambridge in less than half an hour.

A branch to Lincoln would probably be a reasonable investment as the terrain is flat and there is ample railway land adjacent to the existing station for the big new platforms that are required.

That would solve a massive problem, plugging the east-west gap and making a 'not via London' service from the ECML corridor to the West Midlands practical. It's about time someone did something about this.

Well the 95% population objective probably wouldn't require it with careful laying out of the South Wales and North Wales lines....

But you might be able to assemble a case for a high speed line to Aberdeen... although it might end up being single track north of the Forth, although attempting that with 250kph dynamic loops would be.... interesting.

Scaling this back to a 125mph section between Inverkeithing and Leuchars, and dualling the viaduct at Montrose would do pretty much the same thing. The Fife Coast is just about the slowest part of the Aberdeen Road, and this would bring Aberdeen within a 2-hour radius of Edinburgh and Glasgow. To prevent Kirkaldy from being hung out to dry, it might be possible to rebuild the line right around the coast to St Andrew's and Tayport, rejoining the current route at Tay Bridge South Junction, so making the Fife Circle longer. A new crossing between Leith and Kirkaldy is also worth looking at, although it's a bit deep for a tunnel and would be a very difficult bridge to build.

 

[The Ham]

But you might be able to assemble a case for a high speed line to Aberdeen... although it might end up being single track north of the Forth, although attempting that with 250kph dynamic loops would be.... interesting.

Although at less than 200km from Edinburgh to Aberdeen it would be fairly easy to have a service which ran every two hours and do away with the need for loops. If anyone wanted to get to somewhere at some other point in time they'd just use conventional rail to get to there.

Of course if there was a stop at Dundee with two lines it would enable the frequency to increase without the need for such large loops, but at the expense of speed.

 

[Hove Heretic]

Fantasy station improvement: Brighton could take a leaf out of Mallorca's book and as for Palma Intermodal, drop the running lines into a new station chamber further south below Queens Road allowing decent platform access for services from all three routes with 12 (or if future proofing - 16) coach trains.

On the plus side:

Direct easy access to Brighton City Centre (especially Churchill Sq.)

Within shouting distance of the seafront for all them grockles

Could release land for house building

Could include bus facilities underground to clear the eternal bus jam in Churchill Sq.

The magnificent train shed could be removed to the seafront for all-weather protection, or as at London Bridge, simply got shut of.

And against:

Some (though I doubt all) may view the demolition and rebuilding of the listed train shed and a few dozen listed buildings in Queens Road as controversial

The odd spot of heavy engineering over a few hundred metres needed to lower lines the necessary few metres

Slight issue of cost

It's never going to happen

 

[LE Greys]

Although at less than 200km from Edinburgh to Aberdeen it would be fairly easy to have a service which ran every two hours and do away with the need for loops. If anyone wanted to get to somewhere at some other point in time they'd just use conventional rail to get to there.

Of course if there was a stop at Dundee with two lines it would enable the frequency to increase without the need for such large loops, but at the expense of speed.

Make it 2tph, one stopping only at Dundee and Edinburgh before going on to London or Birmingham/South West. That would give a 90-minute service to Edinburgh, plus the cross-border link. The other would take in the existing stations and maybe a few more. Quite a few places would be up in arms about it, Leuchars with all its St Andrew's students for a start (which is part of the point of extending the Fife Coast) and Stonehaven for the tourist trade. All of this is deliverable with HSTs, Voyagers and 170s with no need even for electrification, although that's obviously preferred.

 

[The Ham]

Fantasy station improvement: Brighton could take a leaf out of Mallorca's book and as for Palma Intermodal, drop the running lines into a new station chamber further south below Queens Road allowing decent platform access for services from all three routes with 12 (or if future proofing - 16) coach trains.

On the plus side:

Direct easy access to Brighton City Centre (especially Churchill Sq.)

Within shouting distance of the seafront for all them grockles

Could release land for house building

Could include bus facilities underground to clear the eternal bus jam in Churchill Sq.

The magnificent train shed could be removed to the seafront for all-weather protection, or as at London Bridge, simply got shut of.

And against:

Some (though I doubt all) may view the demolition and rebuilding of the listed train shed and a few dozen listed buildings in Queens Road as controversial

The odd spot of heavy engineering over a few hundred metres needed to lower lines the necessary few metres

Slight issue of cost

It's never going to happen

Alternatively build a tram system for Brighton and include it in NR ticketing structure. That way anyone travelling a fairly long distance would have their journey on the tram included in their ticket price, but those travelling short distances would have to pay a small increase to go the extra distance. If it were possible to link the two lines which run east/west into Brighton into the tram network and run them as tram-trains that would bring bigger benefits.

 

[Willoughby]

First ever post so apologies if covering old ground.

How about removing flat crossing at Newark with flyover (as long planned) but replace with new line that loops south to form Lincoln-Northgate-Castle line serving high level platforms at re-sited Northgate, with low level platforms moved half a mile north to just south of A46 bypass. NNG-Lincoln shuttle would then be scrapped and replaced with hourly express Nottingham-Newark Castle-NNG-Lincoln-Cleethorpes that connects with ECML and hourly stopper.

See map attached

Looks like there is room for two islands to allow better regulation of ECML and allow direct, more frequent London-Lincoln services to serve station before heading under new flyover and then joining new line half a mile east. Benefits would be:

- increase capacity and linespeed to 125 mph on ECML with energy and brake savings on every service
- increased reliability on ECML and Nottingham-Lincoln
- increased capacity for pax to allow and Humber Ports freight on Nottingham-Lincoln line
- much better connections north and south at Northgate for Lincoln and Grimsby and north for Nottingham to Doncaster, York etc
- much better train and crew utilisation by merging Lincoln-Nottingham service with Northgate shuttle
- better regulated ECML with non-stop services able to overtake stoppers and more frequent London-Lincoln services

Obviously would require significant engineering but heading east from Castle the line could use what looks like an old embankment (?) then cross the Trent on a new bridge (as any new flyover would have to), head north east to new interchange station, use closed Henkel factory site, parallel A46 then cross it when the road reaches ground level to rejoin chord line from ECML to Lincoln.

In summary the much needed flyover's business case should finally be acceptable due to massively increased benefits.

 

[HSTEd]

Scaling this back to a 125mph section between Inverkeithing and Leuchars, and dualling the viaduct at Montrose would do pretty much the same thing. The Fife Coast is just about the slowest part of the Aberdeen Road, and this would bring Aberdeen within a 2-hour radius of Edinburgh and Glasgow. To prevent Kirkaldy from being hung out to dry, it might be possible to rebuild the line right around the coast to St Andrew's and Tayport, rejoining the current route at Tay Bridge South Junction, so making the Fife Circle longer. A new crossing between Leith and Kirkaldy is also worth looking at, although it's a bit deep for a tunnel and would be a very difficult bridge to build.

The problem with upgrading the line is you end up having to spend lots and lots of money to gauge clear it for GC if you are not careful.

I would ideally like to be able to run 400m 1300 seat double decker sets all the way to Aberdeen.
Clearing it is likely to be far expensive than clearing something like the Atlantic Coast line, which has few overbridges/tunnels where height is going to be an issue.

A newbuild line would solve this problem, but then as you say you have to decide where to build the new stations....
You could probably manage a stop every 20 miles or so if you were happy with only 80-90mph average speed using trains with TGV Duplex acceleration characteristics. (Albeit something derived from a V150 instead of a normal Duplex).

 

[southern442]

I have drawn up plans for a new cross country mainline between Land's end and Cape Wrath via John o Groats. This line would have 155 MPH running, and would link with (some previously mentioned) railway isolated towns, including: Gosport, Padstow, Wells, Glastonbury, Tavistock, Cirencester, Holmfirth, Ripon, Jedburgh and Ullapol.

 

[CallySleeper]

My own pipe-dream would be for the re-instatement of Elmton & Creswell to Clowne, Staveley, and then via Renishaw/Eckington, Beighton to Woodhouse, with stations at those locations built or re-instated. The present alternate "short" Robin Hood workings that terminate at Mansfield Woodhouse would extend to Creswell and then via this route into Sheffield. We'd then have connected these places directly to Sheffield. In the case of the existing RHL stations, avoiding what is just about always a long wait at Worksop, and bringing trains back to the other places. Much of the track is in situ (but overgrown); pointwork at Elmton & Creswell is missing.

My intention was to extend the Mansfield terminators to Ollerton, Edwinstowe and a new parkway intersection station at Tuxford (for the A1 and ECML)

Or, I had often wondered about the possibility of running direct Doncaster - Worksop, and then (fast?) to Nottingham. Maybe an extension of the hourly RHL service.

 

[30mog]

What use will this be when by 2014 Sheffield to London will be achieved in less than two hours?



Oh don't be so ridiculous! How do you define "everyday life" and who is "we". Those shops and businesses wouldn't be there if they weren't making enough turnover to record a profit. I can't ever recall having a spoonful of Champagne. Nobody is forcing you to patronise these businesses and the renovation of St Pancras is nothing short of fantastic.

When I take the MML into St.P. I get off, get downstairs to FCC booking office ASAP and top up my Oystercard at the machine there. I have to see as little as possible of the place. Then usually leave on an FCC going a stop or two south - even if a bit of an illogical route. I have walked through the main concourse a few times - every time I felt a million faces were staring at me in disgust as if to suggest I had no right to be there. I honestly felt CRIMINALIZED! End of.

I get no such feeling at Wakefield Kirkgate - despite it resembling the railhead of a Nazi death camp.

 

[LE Greys]

The problem with upgrading the line is you end up having to spend lots and lots of money to gauge clear it for GC if you are not careful.

I would ideally like to be able to run 400m 1300 seat double decker sets all the way to Aberdeen.
Clearing it is likely to be far expensive than clearing something like the Atlantic Coast line, which has few overbridges/tunnels where height is going to be an issue.

A newbuild line would solve this problem, but then as you say you have to decide where to build the new stations....
You could probably manage a stop every 20 miles or so if you were happy with only 80-90mph average speed using trains with TGV Duplex acceleration characteristics. (Albeit something derived from a V150 instead of a normal Duplex).

That's one of the main reasons I'd make all HS stock classic-compatible. My original idea was to use cascaded and shortened Eurostars. The idea is that they could then take over directly from Pendys or IC225s (or IEPs) as soon as the first part of HS2 is opened. The second generation might be captive-size, but only once HS2 has reached Scotland, making it worthwhile for the likely fleet size and mainly intended for through services to the Continent rather than domestic. Meanwhile, there would still be a need for second-generation classic-compatible stock for off-route work.

The other idea is to use existing stations wherever possible, even if it means miles of tunnel or bulldozing a path to them (this is a fantasy thread after all). Where that can't be done, if there's a former station available such as Nottingham Victoria, just turn out the occupants and reinstate the track. That would end the need for stations in the suburbs, where they would need to move the existing transport links to serve the new station and provide a rapid link to the city centre. Ideally, it would avoid the possibility of running down a station and the area around it. For smaller stations (e.g. Stonehaven and Leuchars) I don't see any need to increase the loading gauge ever, just increase the service frequency and lengthen the trains, then quadruple the line when it fills up.

 

[edwin_m]

I have drawn up plans for a new cross country mainline between Land's end and Cape Wrath via John o Groats. This line would have 155 MPH running, and would link with (some previously mentioned) railway isolated towns, including: Gosport, Padstow, Wells, Glastonbury, Tavistock, Cirencester, Holmfirth, Ripon, Jedburgh and Ullapol.

You forgot Lutterworth.

 

[LE Greys]

With regards to some of the other comments above, I would like to start a new company to serve simple food on trains and stations, the Railway Dining Company. The intention is to provide simple, cheap food to passengers. A typical lunch should cost less than £5 for a full meal, less than £3 for a sandwich and hot drink, and no hot drink should cost more than £1. There will be two types of coffee, black and white. Menus should include egg & chips or bacon sarnies as standard options, with pointless additions (salad and mayonnaisse) banished to wherever they came from.

Typical station rent will probably mean this will go bust within a month, but at least it will have lots of customers.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I don't think removal of the flat crossing at Newark is fantasy i think it will happen. And i think that certain people, such as those that continue to bang on with ideas in the Lincolnshire thread should be campaigning for this rather than what they are currently asking for. This problem is far more detrimental to Lincolnshire than any other factor IMHO. By my back of the packet calcs you could get a gradient of about 1 in 60 presuming 6m clearence needed plus bridge deck etc. If you can make it a thin bridge deck with a thin trackbed you can probably get 1 in 80. That is doable. And frankly i can't see why Network Rail are not looking at it more closely.

 

[Willoughby]

Agree. The Crossing effctively throttles services east of it into Lincs and that is the root of many of the county's rail problems. My (fantasy?) solution aims to make a flyover much more useful by creating a Tamworth-style high level/low level interchange between the ECML and Lincs/East Notts

 

[Hove Heretic]

Alternatively build a tram system for Brighton and include it in NR ticketing structure. That way anyone travelling a fairly long distance would have their journey on the tram included in their ticket price, but those travelling short distances would have to pay a small increase to go the extra distance. If it were possible to link the two lines which run east/west into Brighton into the tram network and run them as tram-trains that would bring bigger benefits.

A tram system was discussed (quite a while back now), and rejected, from memory due to a combination of high initial cost and lack of flexibility. The ovehead wiring issue didn't go down too well locally either, so a suggestion for using trolleybuses with auxiliary batteries went the same way.

B&H Bus & Coach Co. are currently trialling battery/diesel hybrid buses which work turn and about with conventional vehicles on 'Metro' route 7 (Hove-Centre-Hospital-Marina).

The city is a 'Plusbus' area, and we also now have electronic ticketing. The local bus services are, on the whole, very good, if somewhat pricey for walk-on fares. There's always more to be done in the ticketing area, but there seems a real willingness to look at new solutions, and contact between the bus company and town hall are better than in most areas.

Connecting West and East Coastways has been discussed. Indeed, some services have in the past run between them, via Brighton's platform 3, limited to four coaches, but a combination of restricted practical train length, time to reverse and crossing the main London lines at grade tip the balance against the operation. These days, I believe only match-day football specials to the Amex (Falmer) Stadium perform this trick.

The topography of Brighton also works against any possibility of connecting the coastway lines together. As soon as the East line leaves Brighton, it curves sharply right and strides across a massive brick arch viaduct running very nearly to the first station out (London Road - which it's actually nowhere near!). On the West Coastway, lines (and platforms 1/2) curve sharply left into a cutting before tunnelling under the Seven Dials area on their way to Hove. The old MPD (now a parcels depot) used to lie in the 'V' between the west and London routes.

The main Brighton station is inconventiently located from an operational point of view, but the last people to try and clear the necessary land to move it south (around 70 years ago) were the Luftwaffe, although they turned out not to have planning permission. A lot of folks down here would say contemporary redevelopments have been little more sympathetic to the city.

 

[StupidQuestion]

I think that Newark plan sounds ideal Willoughby. Would be nice, after MML electrification, to electrify Nottingham - Lincoln. This would allow electric Lincoln - London, Lincoln - Nottingham and Lincoln - Leicester services.
Then run 1tph Lincoln - Nottingham 'semi-fast' Lincoln - Newark NG - Nottingham
1tph Lincoln - Leicester 'semi-fast' Lincoln - Neward NG - Nottingham - Loughborough - Leicester
1tph Lincoln - Nottingham stopping
1tph Lincoln - Leicester stopping
Perhaps the Nottingham trains could be extended to Toton in future.
I don't know how many paths there are currently on the ECML for Lincoln - Kings Cross trains though. I guess there should be more post-HS2 phase 2. Maybe 2tph to Kings Cross could be achieved at that point (in the fantasy).
Does anyone with more knowledge know the best/fastest route for trains from the ECML to Cleethorpes/Grimsby? Would it be via Newark-Lincoln, Doncaster-Sunthorpe or even Retford-Brigg? Assuming future spare paths on the ECML and necessary junctions, signalling etc are made.

 

[Fred26]

Okay, my turn.

I'd extend the LTS across the estuary from Thurrock to Canvey Island. An un-electrified single track line already exists for part of the way, so I'd upgrade that to dual-track electrified, build a new station at Corringham and one at Canvey Island. Two services an hour, calling all stations from Fenchurch Street, via Rainham to Grays, then Tilbury Town, East Tilbury, Corringham and Canvey Island. This would be an extension of the current Grays terminators.

I have other ideas for south Essex which I shall post later.