Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Between the Birmingham north junctions and the Crewe area it would have to carry all the trains between London/Birmingham and Manchester/Liverpool/Leeds/NE/Scotland on one double track. This might even exceed the trains per hour planned south of Birmingham. The plans show four tracks from the Birmingham branch junction to the start of the Eastern leg, so if that is built there is no such two-track bottleneck because Birmingham-Eastern and London-NW trains can run parallel.
It’s not rash at all. If what you say is completely valid, then th3 business case for HS2 East was always dead in the water and there it reduces the case for the 3x400m trains planned to Manchester & Birmingham too.
With the eastern branch, there would be 11 x 200m trains leaving Euston to head to Manchester and Leeds each hour. Manchester-Leeds has been planned for 6-8 200m trains per hour. Manchester-Birmingham planned for 2x200m trains per hour; Leeds-Birmingham had 2x200m trains per hour and Birmingham-Newcastle had 1x200m train per hour.
The only way to satisfy that capacity with a line via Manchester is to run 6x400m trains between London & Leeds and 2x400m trains between Birmingham & Leeds, with a split for Newcastle. Otherwise we are saying the whole HS2 capacity plan was nonsense.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
With that capacity to Manchester (the equivalent of 2x400m trains to Manchester), the whole HS2 business case falls down. I doubt the BCR would work on the Y-network if capacity was reduced by a third.
It’s not rash at all. If what you say is completely valid, then th3 business case for HS2 East was always dead in the water and there it reduces the case for the 3x400m trains planned to Manchester & Birmingham too.
Under full Phase 2b, the 3tph to Leeds aren’t just to Leeds. All also serve EM Hub. One serves Birmingham Interchange. Another splits at EM, with half to Sheffield. The Leeds journey time would be 81 minutes.
If the services are to go to Leeds via Manchester (which is by no means certain, as NPR may not be 400m train compatible) all those EM Hub passengers would be missing. Also there will be fewer Leeds passengers as the journey time will be about 105 minutes. Yes there will be a few more Huddersfield passengers, but that’s at the margins.
Under full Phase 2b, the 3tph to Leeds aren’t just to Leeds. All also serve EM Hub. One serves Birmingham Interchange. Another splits at EM, with half to Sheffield. The Leeds journey time would be 81 minutes.
If the services are to go to Leeds via Manchester (which is by no means certain, as NPR may not be 400m train compatible) all those EM Hub passengers would be missing. Also there will be fewer Leeds passengers as the journey time will be about 105 minutes. Yes there will be a few more Huddersfield passengers, but that’s at the margins.
So taking in to account the East Midlands passengers being removed, the question would be of the 5x200m units that head to Leeds, what % would actually be going to Leeds? Within the mix, you need to consider transpennine traffic too and the point of NPR was to provide higher capacity at a higher speed.
So taking in to account the East Midlands passengers being removed, the question would be of the 5x200m units that head to Leeds, what % would actually be going to Leeds? Within the mix, you need to consider transpennine traffic too and the point of NPR was to provide higher capacity at a higher speed.
That looks to me like a very early version of the plans, before the details of the junction had been properly thought about. The layout that has been proposed in that area, for a substantial number of years now, has six tracks between the north corner of the triangular junction and the turnoff of the route to the East Midlands (and to Leeds if not dropped), with grade separation at both ends of the six-track section. I believe it would allow
I fully appreciate that the NPR plans incorporate Liverpool, but those plans don’t incorporate the idea of London & Birmingham services using the line between Manchester & Leeds and it assumes HS2 east is built. The point here is that the Integrated Rail Plan will move plans on and if the eastern leg is canned and London/Birmingham-Leeds services are routed via Manchester, there will be no capacity for Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds on the NPR line. TfN have scoped the proposals for NPR but none of it allows for at least 12 trains per hour as far as I can see.
1. If an entirely newly built infrastructure doesn’t allow for at least 15 trains/hour (provided that all have the same stops, which seems to be the case here), there is something wrong.
2. from an outside perspective, the idea of planning to have 6 or even 8 standalone trains an hour between Manchester and Leeds is outright weird. Having a train every 15 minutes is, between not so close cities, a perfectly adequate turn-up-and-go service. If it is an entirely new-built line, it will be a line able to cope with 400m double-deck stock, carrying around 1200 passengers. Having almost 5000 pax/hour between Leeds and Manchester on a 4 trains/h schedule feels like a lot (even if it’s only 260 m single deck trains, that’s a lot of capacity); additional trains - and the corresponding infrastructure- would really only be justified if you have more passengers, not on terms of frequency alone (that’s how the Swiss managed to have such a good train service - build what is necessary, but never more than that).
Which means that there should easily be enough train paths on NPR between Leeds and Manchester to serve both Leeds - London (say 4 trains/h) and Leeds - Liverpool (another 4 trains/h) - and Leeds - Birmingham too, probably 2 trains/h).
You’d hope so. But given we don’t have the facts (some on this forum might but can’t say!), it’s interesting to test the hypothesis.
Assuming 3x400m trains to Manchester are still needed, if the East Midlands passengers represented 20% of the capacity leaving Euston on the eastern branch on the 5x200m units, it would mean an additional 4x 200m units need to be added to the services heading towards Manchester (5x400m tph).
If the East Midlands represents 40% of capacity to Leeds, an additional 3x200m units need to be added to the Manchester services (4x400m plus 1x200m) but that would be inefficient out of Euston unless paired with a Liverpool or Scotland service.
I doubt East Mids passengers represent 60% of the Leeds trains.
Therefore perhaps to take in to account the trans pennine traffic, you’d still run 6 tph out of Euston, but split all 6 at Piccadilly. This would provide enough capacity for the Leeds-London and half the Manchester-Leeds passengers.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
1. If an entirely newly built infrastructure doesn’t allow for at least 15 trains/hour (provided that all have the same stops, which seems to be the case here), there is something wrong.
2. from an outside perspective, the idea of planning to have 6 or even 8 trains an hour between Manchester and Leeds is outright weird. Having a train every 15 minutes is, between not so close cities, a perfectly adequate turn-up-and-go service. If it is an entirely new-built line, it will be a line able to cope with 400m double-deck stock, carrying around 1200 passengers. Having almost 5000 pax/hour between Leeds and Manchester on a 4 trains/h schedule feels like a lot; additional trains - and the corresponding infrastructure- would really only be justified if you have more passengers, not on terms of frequency alone (that’s how the Swiss managed to have such a good train service - build what is necessary, but never more than that).
Which means that there should easily be enough train paths on NPR between Leeds and Manchester to serve both Leeds - London (say 4 trains/h) and Leeds - Liverpool (another 4 trains/h) - and Leeds - Birmingham too, probably 2 trains/h).
Thank you. I am aware of that, it’s just that I don’t know any comparable city-pair in Europe with such a dense service, except maybe in the Netherlands. So I find it hard to understand it.
Touché! I’ll consider you to be in the know (that feels more clandestine!). Either way, you’ve changed my mind on the 6x400m requirement travelling across the Pennines.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Thank you. I am aware of that, it’s just that I don’t know any comparable city-pair in Europe with such a dense service, except maybe in the Netherlands. So I find it hard to understand it.
I’d argue that Leeds & Manchester have a huge economic potential that is unrealised. A 6 tph frequency at a very good journey time, 25 mins let’s say, will assist with that.
I’d argue that Leeds & Manchester have a huge economic potential that is unrealised. A 6 tph frequency at a very good journey time, 25 mins let’s say, will assist with that.
And I‘d argue that 4 tph would do exactly the same. I know, it’s not up to me to say what you should do, but you Brits really aim for a lot (and sorry for interfering!).
Yes, the plans I found show a four-track section, but the "fast" centre lines are not accessible to either of Bham-NE or London-NW traffic, so these routes would conflict on the "slow" outer lines
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
But the Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds conurbation is as populous and as closely spaced as the Netherlands. It is only the barrier of the Pennines which stops it acting as a single City-Region. So I agree the unconstrained potential traffic could be huge. To see what I mean, just compare the night-time light footprint of the two regions: https://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/78000/78674/london_lights_2012087_lrg.jpg
the Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds conurbation is as populous and as closely spaced as the Netherlands. It is only the barrier of the Pennines which stops it acting as a single City-Region. So I agree the unconstrained potential traffic could be huge. To see what I mean, just compare the night-time light footprint of the two regions: https://eoimages.gsfc.nasa.gov/images/imagerecords/78000/78674/london_lights_2012087_lrg.jpg
The question is though, whether the dense service in the Netherlands is on principle or because the demand is there.
I don’t know the Netherlands enough to have an answer. The Swiss, however, only go above 2 tph if actual demand requires it (meaning that otherwise, trains are full and would need to leave passengers behind) not on principle, since they consider 2 tph as attractive enough (and their Modal Split doesn’t contradict them.
Under full Phase 2b, the 3tph to Leeds aren’t just to Leeds. All also serve EM Hub. One serves Birmingham Interchange. Another splits at EM, with half to Sheffield. The Leeds journey time would be 81 minutes.
If the services are to go to Leeds via Manchester (which is by no means certain, as NPR may not be 400m train compatible) all those EM Hub passengers would be missing. Also there will be fewer Leeds passengers as the journey time will be about 105 minutes. Yes there will be a few more Huddersfield passengers, but that’s at the margins.
Is there actually any point in London to Leeds via Manchester at (about) 105 minutes? ECML accelerated wanted about 2hrs (can't remember if they were getting close for May 2022). It seems a long way round to Leeds and potentially a lot of money to save around 15 minutes.
Is there actually any point in London to Leeds via Manchester at (about) 105 minutes? ECML accelerated wanted about 2hrs (can't remember if they were getting close for May 2022). It seems a long way round to Leeds and potentially a lot of money to save around 15 minutes.
Is there actually any point in London to Leeds via Manchester at (about) 105 minutes? ECML accelerated wanted about 2hrs (can't remember if they were getting close for May 2022). It seems a long way round to Leeds and potentially a lot of money to save around 15 minutes.
Like the whole of HS2, it's about capacity rather than journey time.
Taking 3tph Leeds off the ECML provides new capacity for other services.
NPR also gets a boost to its business case.
There aren’t 3tph Leeds services on the ECML, and there will still be a need for at least 1tph London - Leeds on the ECML to pick up the local connectivity.
There aren’t 3tph Leeds services on the ECML, and there will still be a need for at least 1tph London - Leeds on the ECML to pick up the local connectivity.
That Leeds service doesn't need to go any further south than Peterborough towards London though to maintain the connectivity (let's forget about Stevenage for this purpose). There isn't an explicit need for a Leeds to London service.
That Leeds service doesn't need to go any further south than Peterborough towards London though to maintain the connectivity (let's forget about Stevenage for this purpose). There isn't an explicit need for a Leeds to London service.
Well - you can’t ignore Stevenage, and neither can you ignore the London - Peterborough / Grantham, Newark / Retford / Doncaster / Wakefield traffic. If you are having a train from London to these stations, and need a service from these stations to Leeds, it would see the most effective use of resources to run it as one train.
Well - you can’t ignore Stevenage, and neither can you ignore the London - Peterborough / Grantham, Newark / Retford / Doncaster / Wakefield traffic. If you are having a train from London to these stations, and need a service from these stations to Leeds, it would see the most effective use of resources to run it as one train.
The London to (intermediate stations) train can go to Hull or York and the Leeds to (intermediate stations) train can go to Cambridge, Ipswich or Norwich instead of the current trains from Birmingham, Peterborough or Nottingham. Isn't this the whole point of both HS2 and NPR to allow different links on the classic services?
The same applies on NPR. If NPR provides the through service, the stopping trains don't need to - eg Leeds to Huddersfield fast can go onto the Penistone line and Manchester to Huddersfield fast can go to Brighouse / Halifax / Bradford because the fast link between Leeds and Manchester is on the new line.
