Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)

[jfowkes]

Tempted to make some sort of analogy with the A380 and start going on about platform lengths or something but I fear it would break down mid-sentence.

 

[Clip]

I'm sure that the same was said of the Beeching Report, but look how history has proved those times to be so very wrong.

this is a weird comparison because that was about closing lines which we now know was the wrong thing to do because we need the capacity - whereas a new line provides that - a very strange argument

 

[Bletchleyite]

Tempted to make some sort of analogy with the A380 and start going on about platform lengths or something but I fear it would break down mid-sentence.

I'm not sure these aircraft comparisons really work. Aircraft generally operate point-to-point, as a stop-off has significant time and fuel penalty. Trains don't, and you can even attach two together and portion-work. So it is feasible that you could have HS2 operated only using 200m trains running in pairs, or 400m trains, and fill them by adjusting stopping patterns.

 

[quantinghome]

Tempted to make some sort of analogy with the A380 and start going on about platform lengths or something but I fear it would break down mid-sentence.

Double decker 400m long trains are the norm on other high speed networks. The TGV duplex does not suffer a lack of orders.

The A380 analogy would be if a rolling stock supplier were to develop an 800m long triple-decker train and then wonder why it wasn't getting many sales.

 

[Sceptre]

Self driving cars are as of yet unproven technology and do not solve the fundamental issues related to cars as a means of transport. Density, cost, pollution and parking. In regards to Hyperloop and Boring Company, when brought into reality these projects would face the same cost barriers as HS2. I'm sure if there was a magical way to reduce costs associated with construction that the government would be more than happy to implement it!

Also, Hyperloop just wouldn't work in the UK unless you're subjecting your passengers to roller-coaster style accelerations.

 

[si404]

Also, Hype-r-loopy just wouldn't work

Fixed it for you.

The A380 analogy would be if a rolling stock supplier were to develop an 800m long triple-decker train and then wonder why it wasn't getting many sales.

Or rather, have a surprising glut of sales of a bespoke train (eg classic-compatibles for HS2, or the massive one you describe) aimed at a specific situation after someone unexpected decides to buy massive numbers of them*, and then wonder why sales dried up when everyone interested had had their fill. There'll be demand for an A380-style plane again (unlike Concorde), however it'll be when the current lot get life-expired.

*Surely a key factor for their creation was BA's desire to get more people to/from Heathrow despite the limited space? And Air France liked the sound of it too, so that's both the airlines that Airbus really cares about serving dealt with - 20 planes sold. A few more airlines wanted a handful and we're at about 50. And then Emirates come along and end up buying over 100!

 

[Lucan]

Also, Hyperloop just wouldn't work in the UK unless you're subjecting your passengers to roller-coaster style accelerations.

It would work (in that respect) provided that the maximum line curvature is kept to very gradual levels in both the horizontal and vertical planes. As centrifugal acceleration is proportional to the square of the velocity for a given curvature, and Hyperloop [HL] goes more than 3x faster than HS2, the HL would need its curvatures to be an order of magnitude more gentle. It seems to be generally overlooked that this will require some spectacular and expensive civil works - even almost imperceptibly low hills will need to be cut through or tunneled, and slight valleys crossed on viaducts.

Just as an example of nonsensical HL hype, take a look at the promotional artist's impression below. It seems to have completely escaped the promoters that the Golden Gate bridge was built with a high and wide span for a reason. Instead they tell us that HL can be built cheaply with oil pipeline technology, on low pillars all the way, and apparently with no need to purchase any more land area than the pillars' feet occupy. Of course, the HL test sections have been built in flat desert-like areas so the issue is avoided for now. This picture, which has gathered criticism, epitomises the fairy-tale mentality of its advocates :-

 

[Geezertronic]

How does any Hyperloop solution integrate with the classic network though? It's not as if Hyperloop can come onto the WCML at Lichfield and progress up to Scotland

 

[mmh]

Double decker 400m long trains are the norm on other high speed networks. The TGV duplex does not suffer a lack of orders.

No they're not. There are no 400m double deck trains anywhere. The TGV duplex is the only double deck high speed train in the world. Nobody other than France has ever ordered one.

 

[mmh]

Double decker 400m long trains are the norm on other high speed networks. The TGV duplex does not suffer a lack of orders.

No they're not. There are no 400m double deck trains anywhere. The TGV duplex is the only double deck high speed train in the world. Nobody other than France has ever ordered one.

 

[Three-Nine]

Does the E4 series shinkansen count? By my rough estimate, 2 8 car E4s coupled together is approx. 400 metres, though I guess it depends on whether or not one considers 150mph "high speed" or not:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E4_Series_Shinkansen

 

[hwl]

No they're not. There are no 400m double deck trains anywhere. The TGV duplex is the only double deck high speed train in the world. Nobody other than France has ever ordered one.

Alstom keeps getting TGV orders because it is political suicicde to see Belfort close

 

[Adsy125]

No they're not. There are no 400m double deck trains anywhere. The TGV duplex is the only double deck high speed train in the world. Nobody other than France has ever ordered one.

I guess Morocco doesn't exist then...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroduplex

 

[si404]

How does any Hyperloop solution integrate with the classic network though? It's not as if Hyperloop can come onto the WCML at Lichfield and progress up to Scotland

The Hype-r-loopy can stop somewhere at Crewe (the plan for HS2 if not serving Stafford, providing 2A does open with phase 1), and the 30 passengers per train can disembark and join a train that seats several hundred and can run just as often to enjoy rest of the journey in comfort?

 

[quantinghome]

No they're not. There are no 400m double deck trains anywhere. The TGV duplex is the only double deck high speed train in the world. Nobody other than France has ever ordered one.

If you want to split hairs then, yes, TGV don't run 400m trains; they run doubled-up 200m duplex trains.
The point is that double decker high speed trains are an off-the-shelf product with a proven in-service record which HS2 could order and use quite easily, massively increasing north-south intercity capacity at a stroke.

 

[camflyer]

If you want to split hairs then, yes, TGV don't run 400m trains; they run doubled-up 200m duplex trains.
The point is that double decker high speed trains are an off-the-shelf product with a proven in-service record which HS2 could order and use quite easily, massively increasing north-south intercity capacity at a stroke.

Are the HS2 tunnels, bridges, stations and other infrastructure being designed to be able to operate double-deck trains?

 

[civ-eng-jim]

Are the HS2 tunnels, bridges, stations and other infrastructure being designed to be able to operate double-deck trains?

On the captive HS2 lines, generally yes - But I'm not sure how the platform/train interface will look. To allow a classic compatible fleet of train, a UK standard heights and offsets no doubt will be used which (I think) would prohibit the use of Duplex TGV as the doors would be too low.

 

[MarkyT]

Are the HS2 tunnels, bridges, stations and other infrastructure being designed to be able to operate double-deck trains?

Yes, the new infrastructure should be capable of carrying double deckers if required. On completion of Phase 2 that could include trains from London to Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds. Interesting to note that while SNCF are currently very keen on bi-level stock, Japanese HS operators are phasing out their remaining double deckers on Shinkansen routes. I understand this is due to their lower speed and sluggish acceleration compared to the latest single deck models and the collapse of very long distance daily commuting into Tokyo since the capital's property market calmed down; people can actually afford to live closer to their employment location today.

 

[MarkyT]

On the captive HS2 lines, generally yes - But I'm not sure how the platform/train interface will look. To allow a classic compatible fleet of train, a UK standard heights and offsets no doubt will be used which (I think) would prohibit the use of Duplex TGV as the doors would be too low.

Don't think the offset matters much as 'gap filler' extending stepboards will be deployed by classic compatible units where new platforms are further away. As to height, the latest duplexes in France have a boarding height just above the lower floor, to match the standard 560mm platform height. There are, I think, two steps down and a lifting platform is also provided at some, maybe all, doors, for PRM purposes. Access to the level above is by stairs only and inter-car connections are upstairs only with continuous level access throughout the unit once you are up there. I suspect the design could be tweaked to accommodate a higher boarding level with more steps going down and fewer going up. With a wider bodyshell, captive double or single deckers would not need to deploy gap fillers.

 

[underbank]

Is there any scope in splitting Voyagers, so that they run doubled up at the South of the WCML but then split at say Crewe, first half to Chester, second half to Manchester, or split at Preston, first half to Blackpool, second half to Glasgow/Edinburgh. Seems a possible way to get more use of the limited slots out of Euston, by doubling up. TPX seem to split/join so I wonder if Virgin do it, and if not, is it complications in joining/separating Voyagers?

 

[Jozhua]

Is there any scope in splitting Voyagers, so that they run doubled up at the South of the WCML but then split at say Crewe, first half to Chester, second half to Manchester, or split at Preston, first half to Blackpool, second half to Glasgow/Edinburgh. Seems a possible way to get more use of the limited slots out of Euston, by doubling up. TPX seem to split/join so I wonder if Virgin do it, and if not, is it complications in joining/separating Voyagers?

Do you mean Pandelinos?

I'm guessing other than the resulting train being twice as long as the Euston platforms it might work!

 

[6Gman]

Is there any scope in splitting Voyagers, so that they run doubled up at the South of the WCML but then split at say Crewe, first half to Chester, second half to Manchester, or split at Preston, first half to Blackpool, second half to Glasgow/Edinburgh. Seems a possible way to get more use of the limited slots out of Euston, by doubling up. TPX seem to split/join so I wonder if Virgin do it, and if not, is it complications in joining/separating Voyagers?

1. The Voyager fleet is (presumably) already fully used so, unless some could be sourced from XC, there are no units available to do it.
2. Peak hour trains are already largely doubled e.g. 1810 & 1910 N Wales.
3. Fairly straightforward going North, but southbound raises resilience issues. If one portion is on time but the other late what do you do?

 

[6Gman]

Do you mean Pandelinos?

I'm guessing other than the resulting train being twice as long as the Euston platforms it might work!

No, he means Voyagers. Not Pendolinos.

 

[Jozhua]

No, he means Voyagers. Not Pendolinos.

Sorry! I didn't know Virgin still ran Voyagers...seemed kind of strange that there are diesel trains running under wires for such a large distance. My first reaction to finding out this fact is they should get Virgin some bi-modes and transfer the 221's to Cross Country (They really need the capacity )

 

[MarkyT]

Sorry! I didn't know Virgin still ran Voyagers...seemed kind of strange that there are diesel trains running under wires for such a large distance. My first reaction to finding out this fact is they should get Virgin some bi-modes and transfer the 221's to Cross Country (They really need the capacity )

The advantage using Virgin's remaining Voyagers is they have tilt so can take advantage of the enhanced speed limits available on the busy and twisty south extremities of the WCML. Track capacity inter-running with Pendolinos is thus preserved.

 

[The Ham]

If we want extra services and extra capacity we could do the following:

- get XC some bimodal trains (ideally a fleet of 7 coach units so the same capacity as a pair of 220's, but could be reformed at a later date to 5/9 coaches if the fleet is enlarged and more capacity is required)

- the released 221's move to the WCML

- lengthen as many as possible to 6 coaches (~310 seats each) to allow the running of 12 coach units to broadly match capacity of 11 coach 390's (if all done that would be 32 X 6 coaches)

- This provides 12 units or 6 extra full length trains. These can then be used for the sort of services listed above and would release a few extra 390's for use and/or lengthen more of the 9 coach versions to 11 coaches.

This would require a lot of work and would gain you 6 full length trains out of an existing fleet of 67. That's a ~10% increase. As such it would help, but not for very long.

 

[The Planner]

It will be the other way around in the short term I suspect, the West Coast Partnership bidders will suggest bi-modes to get rid of the 221s off the WCML.

 

[The Ham]

It will be the other way around in the short term I suspect, the West Coast Partnership bidders will suggest bi-modes to get rid of the 221s off the WCML.

Indeed, I forgot to say that given that there's no new XC franchise that the chance of new trains was slim.

 

[Jozhua]

On the subject of rolling stock, what is known about the proposals for the trains running on HS2?

I heard one company is going with a double decker proposal! Maybe a derivative of the new French TGV's as they're supposed to be both relatively cheap, as well as efficient as well as looking really good! (A two floor bar sound good to anyone? )

Is there any high speed wheeled rolling stock that runs at or is capable of running at 225mph?

 

[Leo1961]

Wouldn't the queue for the single person operating the bar take longer than the journey?