If HS2 was canned, how could infrastructure be improved on the south WCML?

[ZL exile]

Ban freight from the WCML and order a new fleet of Pendolino-type trains (with high density interiors) for secondary and local services so that every train on the line has identical performance.

Some freight could be routed over the Chiltern which would have it's low capacity passenger trains reduced to free capacity.

well that will effectively close the M1,5,42,69 etc to cars then to handle all those extra lorry moves, and cancel the National Express and Megabus services. Then there is the issue of air quality from the extra lorry movements too. Though probably easier to ban all uk / imports via deep sea containers etc..

 

[HSTEd]

well that will effectively close the M1,5,42,69 etc to cars then to handle all those extra lorry moves

Don't be hyperbolic, rail freight is a rounding error.
And some freight can continue to move by secondary routes like the Chiltern.

Though probably easier to ban all uk / imports via deep sea containers etc..

Very funny.

 

[Aictos]

Ban freight from the WCML and order a new fleet of Pendolino-type trains (with high density interiors) for secondary and local services so that every train on the line has identical performance.

Some freight could be routed over the Chiltern which would have it's low capacity passenger trains reduced to free capacity.

Where to start with the reasons why it’s a bad idea....

1. Freight by Rail is far more CO2 friendly as well as economic as you can shift far more cargo.

2. There already exists a well used freight network with hubs at specific locations which make best use of the network.

3. Banning freight from the WCML will only increase HGV journeys which isn’t eco friendly.

4. Even if you divert freight onto the Chiltern, how does it access Daventry for one?

5. I’m sure telling Chiltern users that as their services ain’t busy that they are losing services to cater for the diverted freight will go down very well.

All in one, both are complete non starters!

 

[HSTEd]

1. Freight by Rail is far more CO2 friendly as well as economic as you can shift far more cargo.

Freight by rail can be CO2 friendly.
But the UK rail industry is a disaster in freight terms.

The trains are too small and light to really be worth it.

2. There already exists a well used freight network with hubs at specific locations which make best use of the network.

Which is why two freight trains an hour crawl through the Castlefield Corridor?
How is that the best use of the network.

3. Banning freight from the WCML will only increase HGV journeys which isn’t eco friendly.

The alternative is massive numbers of additional car journeys when the passenger service saturates.
The saved road space is better for passengers.

4. Even if you divert freight onto the Chiltern, how does it access Daventry for one?

The simple is you don't.
You abandon rail connections to the depot and build a new one somewhere else.

5. I’m sure telling Chiltern users that as their services ain’t busy that they are losing services to cater for the diverted freight will go down very well.

Well it deosn't stop it being true.
If you can have a freight train on the WCML and a passenger train on Chiltern or vice versa, you should chose to put the passenger train on the WCML.

11-car Pendolino versus short loco hauled formation.
It's not a difficult choice.

All in one, both are complete non starters!

So what is your plan to deal with HS2 getting axed?

 

[Aictos]

Freight by rail can be CO2 friendly.
But the UK rail industry is a disaster in freight terms.

The trains are too small and light to really be worth it.

Which is why two freight trains an hour crawl through the Castlefield Corridor?
How is that the best use of the network.

The alternative is massive numbers of additional car journeys when the passenger service saturates.
The saved road space is better for passengers.


The simple is you don't.
You abandon rail connections to the depot and build a new one somewhere else.


Well it deosn't stop it being true.
If you can have a freight train on the WCML and a passenger train on Chiltern or vice versa, you should chose to put the passenger train on the WCML.

11-car Pendolino versus short loco hauled formation.
It's not a difficult choice.

So what is your plan to deal with HS2 getting axed?

Well for starters can YOU explain why your proposals should be taken forward?

 

[HSTEd]

Well for starters can YOU explain why your proposals should be taken forward?

Because in the absence of HS2 we are going to need more capacity for high intensity passenger operations on the southern WCML.

 

[Aictos]

Because in the absence of HS2 we are going to need more capacity for high intensity passenger operations on the southern WCML.

And why should Chiltern have reduced services to cater for all those freights? And what about the likes of Daventry, Wembley etc and the staff who work there, you’re just proposing to make them redundant.

 

[HSTEd]

And why should Chiltern have reduced services to cater for all those freights?

Because the alternative is reduced passenger services on the WCML, which will negatively affect far more people.

Every path can carry nearly 600 people on the WCML, Chiltern can't hope to match that.

And what about the likes of Daventry, Wembley etc and the staff who work there, you’re just proposing to make them redundant.

They can get jobs in the road haulage industry or in relocated depots elsewhere.

 

[Aictos]

They can get jobs in the road haulage industry or in relocated depots elsewhere.

I don’t think you’ve given this any thought at all, as the idea of closing a perfectly useable depot because staff can find a job that simple elsewhere beggars belief as it shows no grasp of reality.

 

[R G NOW.]

Spend the money on the WCML. Make that into a sort of HS2.

 

[Aictos]

If the junctions between Rugby and London Euston are converted to either diveunders or flyovers then which ones should be done, why and how?

 

[HSTEd]

I don’t think you’ve given this any thought at all, as the idea of closing a perfectly useable depot because staff can find a job that simple elsewhere beggars belief as it shows no grasp of reality.

The reality is that there will be no room for freight trains on the WCML.
So a depot that can only be accessed via the WCML becomes kind of useless doesn't it?

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the junctions between Rugby and London Euston are converted to either diveunders or flyovers then which ones should be done, why and how?

Ledburn is probably the one that would have the most gain, as it's used several times an hour now.

 

[Aictos]

The reality is that there will be no room for freight trains on the WCML.
So a depot that can only be accessed via the WCML becomes kind of useless doesn't it?

How do YOU know there’s no room for freight on the WCML?

Ledburn is probably the one that would have the most gain, as it's used several times an hour now.

What type though? Would a Diveunder or Flyover be better and why?

I know where Ledburn is and that it’s very busy, just wondering what upgrade would make the most of a upgraded layout at this junction.

 

[HSTEd]

How do YOU know there’s no room for freight on the WCML?

Because passenger growth is continuing, and without HS2 it will swamp the route.
The WCML is creaking as it is.

 

[tbtc]

Where to start with the reasons why it’s a bad idea....

1. Freight by Rail is far more CO2 friendly as well as economic as you can shift far more cargo.

2. There already exists a well used freight network with hubs at specific locations which make best use of the network.

3. Banning freight from the WCML will only increase HGV journeys which isn’t eco friendly.

4. Even if you divert freight onto the Chiltern, how does it access Daventry for one?

5. I’m sure telling Chiltern users that as their services ain’t busy that they are losing services to cater for the diverted freight will go down very well.

All in one, both are complete non starters!

The problem you're ignoring is that there are a limited number of paths on the WCML - using a path for freight may be at the expense of a passenger train with hundreds of people on board (possibly the best part of a thousand on the busiest services) - it may be that one path for slow freight could be more than one path for faster passenger services - so you have to compare the opportunity cost - giving that path to freight means taking "x" HGVs off the roads whilst giving that path to a passenger train means taking "y" cars off the roads.

It's less of an issue on the Chiltern line, where passenger trains aren't as long (and therefore don't have as many passengers), but it's not beyond possibility to build a distribution centre off the M40 so we can shift freight onto the Chiltern line.

 

[Aictos]

Because passenger growth is continuing, and without HS2 it will swamp the route.
The WCML is creaking as it is.

But you haven’t given a realistic alternative though, when you do feel free to share...

 

[The Planner]

Ban freight from the WCML and order a new fleet of Pendolino-type trains (with high density interiors) for secondary and local services so that every train on the line has identical performance.

Some freight could be routed over the Chiltern which would have it's low capacity passenger trains reduced to free capacity.

You would be taking a lot of passenger trains out to do that. The timetable has to run out of sync to get the Calvert trains to work.

Dare I say it! You could reopen as much of old GCR London Extension route as possible for freight and possibly some passenger workings to ree up the WCML and other man routes. If they spent the billions on this route instead of one HS2 line to Birmingham it would just be 'change' compared to those Billions.

Done to death, where are the freight trains going at the southern end?

What type though? Would a Diveunder or Flyover be better and why?

I know where Ledburn is and that it’s very busy, just wondering what upgrade would make the most of a upgraded layout at this junction.

Flyover has always been the plan.

 

[class26]

Spend the money on the WCML. Make that into a sort of HS2.

Sorry but that is really barmy.
The WCML is full now. How is it to be worked on when there are trains wizzing around at 125 mph ? Let`s remember 10 billion was spent 20 years ago and achieved little. The promised upgrade to 140 mph was abandoned. do as you suggest and a fair portion of the budget will go to compensate TOC`s for delays , diversions etc PLUS years and years of bustitution and not actually go into new railway.
With working on a new site you can work 24 hours a day if desired. it just has to be a new railway, its a matter of specification / route etc.

 

[swt_passenger]

Spend the money on the WCML. Make that into a sort of HS2.

Can only assume you’ve read absolutely nothing about HS2 in the almost a year you’ve been here...

 

[Bletchleyite]

What type though? Would a Diveunder or Flyover be better and why?

I know where Ledburn is and that it’s very busy, just wondering what upgrade would make the most of a upgraded layout at this junction.

Whichever is cheaper. It's quite literally in the middle of a field so there's scope to do whatever.

 

[furnessvale]

Don't be hyperbolic, rail freight is a rounding error.
And some freight can continue to move by secondary routes like the Chiltern.

You constantly make posts like this with scant regard to the facts.

When measured in TEUs, between 25% and 35% of shipping containers entering the southern ports travel onwards by rail.

When measured by the only realistic measure ie tonnes/kms, this figure rises to 50%+. I doubt a doubling of the number of container miles leaving Southmpton and Felixstowe by road would be considered helpful or a "rounding error".

 

[Meerkat]

Whichever is cheaper. It's quite literally in the middle of a field so there's scope to do whatever.

What are the conflicting moves at Ledburn?

 

[Bletchleyite]

What are the conflicting moves at Ledburn?

Down fast to down slow crosses the up fast. Up slow to up fast crosses the down slow.

Might be possible to do the other way round but those are the common ones in daily service.

 

[HSTEd]

When measured by the only realistic measure ie tonnes/kms, this figure rises to 50%+. I doubt a doubling of the number of container miles leaving Southmpton and Felixstowe by road would be considered helpful or a "rounding error".

50+% of a small fraction of total freight traffic is a small fraction of freight traffic.
The vast majority of payloads being moved on the roads never leave the country, let alone go through a container port on the South Coast.

Rail moves less than 10% of freight tonne miles in the UK.

 

[furnessvale]

50+% of a small fraction of total freight traffic is a small fraction of freight traffic.
The vast majority of payloads being moved on the roads never leave the country, let alone go through a container port on the South Coast.

Rail moves less than 10% of freight tonne miles in the UK.

Which is concentrated in certain corridors and is still not a "rounding error" unless such rounding accounts for accidents like chernobyl.

 

[Scotrail314209]

One thing I think we really need is a 2nd London - Glasgow train an hour, same with the Liverpool service. These services are getting busier and busier, particularly the train to Glasgow via the Trent Valley. Even the Birmingham one is starting to quake.

Rather than wasting some Pendolinos on the Blackpool North service which practically carts fresh air throughout, they could've used the path to provide a 2nd Liverpool or Glasgow.

 

[The Ham]

. I’m sure telling Chiltern users that as their services ain’t busy that they are losing services to cater for the diverted freight will go down very well.

Given that a lot of the opposition is from the Chilterns then some may suggest that this would serve them right.

However given that this isn't a playground it should be pointed out that whatever scheme is built will have compromises, is why there's problems with HS2, in that no single scheme is going to fix everything.

 

[The Ham]

This is a really interesting question. Hasn't the passenger growth on the Southern WCML over the last decade exceeded the 2.5% assumed in the HS2 business case?

If so and the growth continues at the current rate I can see any decision to cancel phase 1 of HS2 coming back to haunt the government later this decade as as the lack of capacity becomes more accute over the coming years. I carn't see what upgrades can be made on an already congested railway where trains are already 11 or 12 coaches long.

All those that are opposed to HS2 and say we should upgrade existing lines instead never actually specify what works that would entail, how much it would cost or how long it would take and what would be the disruption to existing services in the meantime.

2.5% growth year on year would get us to 25% growth over the 9 years from 2009 to 2018.

As you'll see from the table below this is an average of 49%:
View media item 3340
However you'll also notice that for the WCML this is mostly 70%.

Percentages sometimes are hard to understand or can be miss quoted, if we look at in terms of seats.

If we assume that from a coach of 70 seats that there were 30 in use in 2009, by now that would have gone up to 38, the average is actually 45 and for the WCML it's 51.

As such there's not a whole lot of spare capacity left in that coach, whilst it's true that there's been capacity improvements to provide extra coaches it should be remembered that 2.5% of 170 is more than 2.5% of 100 that coach is going to get very busy very quickly, even with those capacity increases.

Now to deal with the "we'll just a few more coaches", sorry but it's not going to work. The 11 coach 390's have 589 seats whilst the 9 coach ones have 469, that's a total of 1,048 seats.

A HS2 train is likely to have 1,076 seats (assuming same density as an 80x), as such HS2 will be providing a 2 to 1 capacity increase over the current trains.

That's a lot of extra capacity, nothing anyone has suggested is likely to get close to that.

 

[matacaster]

How about double_deck commuter trains? Bullied managed to produce some somewhat tight ones on southern region, which I guess was likely W6, But, WCML is W12 gauge, so surely designing some new double deck stock should be feasible?