HS2 Rolling stock

[sprinterguy]

Thanks, history repeating itself again then !.

I find myself thinking there used to be a straight railway line from near Birmingham New Street through the whole West Midlands conurbation to just beyond Wolverhampton. I am talking about the old GW Snowhill route. If the route was GW then perhaps it is to Brunels LARGE (European ?) loading guage. I think it is all still there ? - has not been developed on apart from trams. I wonder if it was four track or the trams could still be fitted in alongside somehow. Damn waste of a good route otherwise. From Moor Street towards London the trackbed is wide enough for four tracks (if I recall correctly) so I am sure two tracks could be fitted in for HS2. That way HS2 from London could connect up somewhere West of Tysely and deposit HS2 trains onto the heritage network just North of Wolverhapton. The current services that use Snowhill might fit into New Street if New Street no longer supports such a heavy London and Anglo Scottish service OR Moor Street gains more platforms. Moor Street is quite close to New Street (travalator ?). That would avoid the twists and winds of the Trent Valley Route.

The Great Western Snow Hill-Wolves Low Level route was twin track prior to closure, and would offer insufficient width for the increased width of the infrastructure base necessary for High Speed Rail even allowing for its’ broad gauge past, let alone running the Midland Metro alongside it.

Improving connectivity between New Street and Moor Street (for Curzon Street) for the arrival of HS2 into Birmingham is initially focusing on upgrading and refurbishing the New Street-Moor Street pedestrian tunnel under the Bullring, as well as a new footbridge across Smallbrook Queensway. It is envisaged that Curzon Street station will also be served by an extension of Midland Metro.

 

[Nym]

Sorry, but the classic compatable units should have the ability to tilt...

Otherwise we're going to have an HS2 Service to glasgow holding up the pendelino that is now running the Manchester - Scotland route because it can't run as fast... Step backwards anyone?

To go back on what I said erlier, I'd proberbly look at 3 kinds of rolling stock for the line,
- Classic Compatable Non Tilt, this could be the 373 NoL sets
- Classic Compatable Tilt, We have a choice of Alstom, Bombardier or Seimens that can all make these type of units, they could run at the lower EPS differential that would enable a slightly more spacious cabin
- Normal HS2 Trains, Full EU Guage 400m long Running Euston - Brum at first, then Euston - Manchester and Euston - Leeds

If HS Commuter services exist round Manchester (as discussed in the HS2 in Manchester Thread) then some units geared to run at 180mph but accelarate to that between stations could be employed on the Horwich - Picc runs...

 

[RobShipway]

Sorry, but the classic compatable units should have the ability to tilt...

Otherwise we're going to have an HS2 Service to glasgow holding up the pendelino that is now running the Manchester - Scotland route because it can't run as fast... Step backwards anyone?

To go back on what I said erlier, I'd proberbly look at 3 kinds of rolling stock for the line,
- Classic Compatable Non Tilt, this could be the 373 NoL sets
- Classic Compatable Tilt, We have a choice of Alstom, Bombardier or Seimens that can all make these type of units, they could run at the lower EPS differential that would enable a slightly more spacious cabin
- Normal HS2 Trains, Full EU Guage 400m long Running Euston - Brum at first, then Euston - Manchester and Euston - Leeds

If HS Commuter services exist round Manchester (as discussed in the HS2 in Manchester Thread) then some units geared to run at 180mph but accelarate to that between stations could be employed on the Horwich - Picc runs...

So you would not consider the Hitachi IEP trains then that will also possibly if approved by working the services on the GWML when it is electrified?

 

[Crossforth]

So you would not consider the Hitachi IEP trains then that will also possibly if approved by working the services on the GWML when it is electrified?

No as they have a top speed of 125mph (140mph with minor mods)

 

[Nym]

So you would not consider the Hitachi IEP trains then that will also possibly if approved by working the services on the GWML when it is electrified?

No, since I'd want stock to run at full linespeed of 400km/h...

 

[Drsatan]

Sorry, but the classic compatable units should have the ability to tilt...

Otherwise we're going to have an HS2 Service to glasgow holding up the pendelino that is now running the Manchester - Scotland route because it can't run as fast... Step backwards anyone?

To go back on what I said erlier, I'd proberbly look at 3 kinds of rolling stock for the line,
- Classic Compatable Non Tilt, this could be the 373 NoL sets
- Classic Compatable Tilt, We have a choice of Alstom, Bombardier or Seimens that can all make these type of units, they could run at the lower EPS differential that would enable a slightly more spacious cabin
- Normal HS2 Trains, Full EU Guage 400m long Running Euston - Brum at first, then Euston - Manchester and Euston - Leeds

If HS Commuter services exist round Manchester (as discussed in the HS2 in Manchester Thread) then some units geared to run at 180mph but accelarate to that between stations could be employed on the Horwich - Picc runs...

I think that by the time HS2 is opened (assuming it isn't delayed), the 373 NoL sets now owned by SNCF might have been withdrawn or downgraded. Nonetheless, I agree with you that any trains which will head along HS2 to Litchfield and to Manchester and beyond should have tilt capacity installed to run at 125mph instead of 110mph. I think a scaled-down version of the ICE-T (tilting ICE) would be a suitable train. It may even be possible to retain 20-30 390s, and uprate them (if possible) for 225mph operation.

I can't really comment on the design of any UIC gauge trains that would be used between London to Birmingham Curzon Street, given that suitable trains for the route today (AGV, the Siemens Velaro-D) would probably be superseded by a newer design when HS2 finally opens. Nonetheless, I wouldn't be surprised any UIC gauge trains ordered for HS2 are of a Chinese design, given that China is capable of manufacturing its own high speed trains (although most of them are Pendolinos, Shinkansens and ICE sets manufactured under license).

I also believe that there should be at least two intermediate stations on HS2 so HS2 services can act as long-distance commuter services. I suggest that there should be one near Coventry and another to serve Aylesbury and other Chiltern towns. Any trains used on these services would need higher gearing. Additionally, to relieve pressure on FGW services to Oxford, I think a branch should be constructed from HS2 to the south of Oxford. To avoid gauge-clearing three to four miles into Oxford any trains used won't be UIC gauge.

 

[Striker]

I suggest that there should be one near Coventry

There will be. Called Birmingham International. If you think there will be another one to serve Coventry you are living in the home for the terminally bewildered.

 

[Geezertronic]

That would indeed be crazy to serve both Birmingham International and Coventry with a HS2 station given they are only currently 10 minutes apart on the WCML anyway, plus EBW 390s can do EUS-COV in around 1 hour which is good enough for Coventry anyway

The more stops that are added to HS2 between London and Birmingham, there is more chance of potential journeys being slowed down as a result (of course 4 tracking it would allow commuter services to operate alongside high speed trains in an uprated version of what the WCML & ECML does at the moment)

 

[RichW1]

We all know what will happen in all likelyhood: HS2 trains will not tilt, indeed I don't know of any trains capable of 186mph or more that tilts. The only pendolinos are 155mph ones common on the continent that use in Italy's instance, sections of the HS route to get to somewhere else on conventional lines further north where they can do 137mph on classic track unlike ours with our signal constraints.

So, I do wonder what will happen. If these domestic versions for anglo-scottish services were required to tilt...imagine the extra cost; this would be bespoke to the UK system in the extreme!

I'm waiting to see the answer when it all happens. I know it won't be 4 track either which will be a huge oversight and we'll regret it quite quickly!

 

[Peter Sarf]

We all know what will happen in all likelyhood: HS2 trains will not tilt, indeed I don't know of any trains capable of 186mph or more that tilts. The only pendolinos are 155mph ones common on the continent that use in Italy's instance, sections of the HS route to get to somewhere else on conventional lines further north where they can do 137mph on classic track unlike ours with our signal constraints.

So, I do wonder what will happen. If these domestic versions for anglo-scottish services were required to tilt...imagine the extra cost; this would be bespoke to the UK system in the extreme!

I'm waiting to see the answer when it all happens. I know it won't be 4 track either which will be a huge oversight and we'll regret it quite quickly!

Doh !. Good points from several posters. Leads us into the realms of bespoke tilting trains fitting the UK gauge that can go much faster than 125/140 mph. Problem being the trains will be expensive and worse still the leasing company will have to get the profit out of most of them in the time it takes to extend HS2 from Birmingham (or thereabouts) to Manchester. which, even if its done slowly, will take less time than the normal life of a new train.

Only hope of progress is if the time penalty of not being able to tilt beyond the Midlands to Manchester is less than the time saved on HS2. Then 373s are still a benefit - does not have to be perfect just an improvememnt. Also occurs to me that when (if) HS2 opens there wont be many extra trains required as demand wont grow instantaneously. So perhaps the WCML service will reduce thus releasing 390s for use on HS2 (and can these be re-geared to go faster ?). If the time savings from the above are not enough then we have to consider building HS2 beyond the Midlands to nearer Manchester as part of phase one. Perhaps we should be looking at diverting ALL WCML services down the new HS2 anyway as tha improved speeds would mean more services from the same number of trains. That what the last WCML upgrade was supposed to achieve.

Any plans for HS2 do affect the WCML and no-one is going to take over from Virgin and assume their revenue profile will be unaffected by HS2. The two routes are connected so perhaps we should also consider the overall rolling stock requirement for both lines together rather than potential options for HS2 only.

 

[Chris125]

There's a response from the DfT floating around somewhere on this or another forum addressing this point, i think the gist being that some low cost upgrades can mitigate much of the time loss from using non-tilting stock.

Chris

 

[RichW1]

Really? Wow, wonder what the point of 125mph tilting trains was then! Oh yeh, that's right they were supposed to go faster like the other 3 attempted conventional line upgrades of the past! The only thing I would say is that 110mph for non-tilt stock seems a bit unfair south of Nuneaton or between stafford and Warrington as the track isn't so curvacious that it wouldn't allow non-tilt stock to go faster (ERTMS allowing of course)

 

[YesToHS2]

Here is a response I received from HS2 Ltd on the subject. It may not answer all the questions asked but it shows they are looking into ways of retaining speeds on the WCML and gives reasons for not choosing tilt.

http://yestohs2.blogspot.com/2011/01/hs2-beyond-birmingham-response-from-hs2.html

 

[sprinterguy]

Doh !. Good points from several posters. Leads us into the realms of bespoke tilting trains fitting the UK gauge that can go much faster than 125/140 mph. Problem being the trains will be expensive and worse still the leasing company will have to get the profit out of most of them in the time it takes to extend HS2 from Birmingham (or thereabouts) to Manchester. which, even if its done slowly, will take less time than the normal life of a new train.

Only hope of progress is if the time penalty of not being able to tilt beyond the Midlands to Manchester is less than the time saved on HS2. Then 373s are still a benefit - does not have to be perfect just an improvememnt. Also occurs to me that when (if) HS2 opens there wont be many extra trains required as demand wont grow instantaneously. So perhaps the WCML service will reduce thus releasing 390s for use on HS2 (and can these be re-geared to go faster ?). If the time savings from the above are not enough then we have to consider building HS2 beyond the Midlands to nearer Manchester as part of phase one. Perhaps we should be looking at diverting ALL WCML services down the new HS2 anyway as tha improved speeds would mean more services from the same number of trains. That what the last WCML upgrade was supposed to achieve.

Any plans for HS2 do affect the WCML and no-one is going to take over from Virgin and assume their revenue profile will be unaffected by HS2. The two routes are connected so perhaps we should also consider the overall rolling stock requirement for both lines together rather than potential options for HS2 only.

The number of fast services running on the south end of the Classic WCML will be reduced once HS2 opens. I’m highly sceptical of the idea that a Pendolino could be regeared for 225mph running: They could certainly operate a 140mph (Perhaps 155mph? Their maximum +10%? We’d finally see titling trains travelling at the speeds British Rail envisaged at the end of the seventies) “Javelin” style service over HS2 though, serving an intermediate Cotswolds station. Since the WCML VHF timetable was launched, there are few stops out of West Coast expresses that are south of the West Midlands, so transferring many of the fast services serving more northerly destinations to HS2 using classic-compatible trains seems reasonable.

The problem with building tilting classic compatible HS2 trains is that the tilting equipment makes for much heavier bogies, which will have a negative effect on train performance. It also poses a big problem regarding axle weights, as a heavier bogie will cause more track wear and it also limits the application of vehicle articulation, which is much favoured in European high speed rail. I think the Classic compatible trains should be lightweight whilst packing as much power as is possible with a low axle weight: If they are as quick off the mark as possible, then they should be able to match the current Pendolino timings on the northern end of the WCML (Granted that the Pendolinos are already a very fast accelerating train): Given how sinuous that end of the WCML is, I don’t expect that there are many long runs at 125mph, so fast acceleration out of the slower sections strikes me as a competitive edge for Classic-compatible trains to have.

 

[jopsuk]

The Spanish Talgo 350 have passive tilt (not as much tilt as the active system on Pendolinos), are articulated and have a design speed of 350- though I'm not sure if you'd be able to still have a corridor connection if you shrunk the Talgo bogie to "classic compatible" width.

 

[coral reef]

We all know what will happen in all likelyhood: HS2 trains will not tilt, indeed I don't know of any trains capable of 186mph or more that tilts.

The N700, E5 and E6 series shinkansen tilt, as well as the Talgo previously mentioned.

http://www.jreast.co.jp/e5/hayabusa.html#no7

 

[Chris125]

The N700, E5 and E6 series shinkansen tilt, as well as the Talgo previously mentioned.

http://www.jreast.co.jp/e5/hayabusa.html#no7

Hmm, perhaps 'leaning' trains might be a more accurate description! As pointed out by HS2 Ltd...

"The only truly high speed trains with any degree of tilt are the Japanese N700 series, which tilt by only one degree by means of controlled inflation of the air suspension. This enables a small speed increase (taking 255 kph curves at 270 kph), but this would be insufficient to change the radii of the curves which would be necessary on the HS2 route to any significant degree. "

Chris

 

[YesToHS2]

I should have posted the letter here. This is from HS2 Ltd it states quite clearly why none tilt is the proffered option and what they are doing to make sure time savings are retained.

Just to add, the acceleration characteristics of the lighter more powerful HS2 trains will mean they shouldn't pose a problem the the Pendolinos travelling on the line with regards to speed.

http://yestohs2.blogspot.com/2011/01/hs2-beyond-birmingham-response-from-hs2.html

 

[jrhilton]

Lots of talk of Class 373s being ideal for HS2 but in reality things have moved on a long way since they were introduced in terms of overall design and efficiency. They would not be a great choice today, and definitely not in ten+ years time on a brand new line!

Take a look at the Alstom AGV or Siemens ICE3 to see where high-speed electric trains are going, as Alstom and Siemens are leading the way in Europe at the moment.

If it were me making the decision today and we needed something ordered in the next year or so, I would go for TGV Réseau power cars with either Duplex carriages or Réseau single-deck carriages or ICE3s.

If you have to choose in 5-7 years time and order in advance, then it would be AGV or again ICE3 (or maybe ICE4 if it is around then).

We are better off using off the shelf, proven technology and taking advantage of decades of intensive research that companies like Alstom and Siemens have done. Plus it is less lickly to go miles over budget that way, as it the tradition in the UK! It is sad though that the UK doesn't have anything to really compete with AGVs and ICE3s and I don't think we can make something at a competitive price either.

The above assumes the trains are for HS2 only and the route is European gauge, if they have to go on the UK Classic railway too, or it is UK gauge then perhaps a Hitachi A-train variant like the 395.

Lots of enthusiasts don't seem to like it, but the future is light weight, engine under the floor, high power to weight ratio trains, not ones with huge power cars at each end like the 373s able to draw ~12Mw of power when accelerating in a section of tunnel. Efficiency will be key I believe, as the UK National Grid in the south east is not strong enough to have HS2 running lots and lots of 12Mw trains off a single phase input, especially if you need tunnels out of London, so you will need to use phase balancers as is the case for HS1. That is another great reason for using more efficient modern trains as a starting point than using 373s.

I would also go for ETCS signalling too....

 

[jon0844]

Unless we want years of 'teething problems', I also suggest that we swallow our pride and ensure the trains aren't put together here.. at least not anything involving Bombardier.

I can't believe anywhere else has such problems with new rolling stock as we do.

 

[jopsuk]

Surely ETCS (level 2 at least) is already specified?

 

[YesToHS2]

@jrhilton, I don't think anyone will question that distributed power is the way forward.

Alstom's AVG does look like a good contender as it can already reach speeds of 220mph. With 10 years of practical use before HS2 opens any niggles can be ironed out with speeds and efficiency further increased. It just goes to show that HS2 isn't some pie in the sky idea with new high speed railways already being built with 220mph trains in mind.

What is amazing is the efficiencies they are getting from the new generation of trains.
This is an extract from an article I wrote explaining what HS2 is about.

"A little known fact is that the new Alstom AGV which is capable of 360km/h, due to go into service on a new Italian high speed network this year, is as efficient as a first generation TGV capable of 300km/h. Even more remarkable is that the AGV will consume only a fraction more energy per seat than the current fleet of Pendolinos on the WCML which travel 100mph slower!"

I'm sure for the Classic compatible trains the body can be modified to fit with the smaller loading gauge of the WCML. Can't see there being much of a problem using the rolling chassis and then putting a similar shaped small body on it?

 

[MCR247]

What would it take to modify the northern WCML to European loading gauge?

 

[WatcherZero]

North as in from Lichfield (phase 1) or North as in Scotland (Phase 2)? The former probably a huge amount, the latter probably far less.

 

[jrhilton]

What is amazing is the efficiencies they are getting from the new generation of trains.

Very true, although 300km/h and 360km/h is only a difference of 60km/h, the actual effort required to go 360km/h vs 300km/h is much larger than the absolute difference in km/h alone implies.

In day to day running the current generation of TGVs and ICEs are also amazingly reliable even before you consider the speeds and distances they are averaging over their lifetimes. If we didn't want to spend the money developing something here in the UK, both would be good choices, with a proven record in operation and on the safety side too.

 

[MCR247]

North as in from Lichfield (phase 1) or North as in Scotland (Phase 2)? The former probably a huge amount, the latter probably far less.

For London to Glasgow HS

 

[Peter Sarf]

Unless we want years of 'teething problems', I also suggest that we swallow our pride and ensure the trains aren't put together here.. at least not anything involving Bombardier.

I can't believe anywhere else has such problems with new rolling stock as we do.

Carefull.

Siemens are having well publicised teething problems with their 380s for Scotland. Alsthom were completely useless with aftermarket support for the 175s, 180s and 458s when they came into service, does that count as a French company or a subsidiary in Britain. The French would not buy from abroad and fight to protect their own industry. The French, ALLEGEDLY, also massage the their availability figures. The Germans just happen to be damn good engineers.

A lot goes into makng a good company. Good products, motivated staff, aftermarket support, reliable demand for the product and then luck. Compare parts of British Leyland: Longbridge (S Birmingham) was originally Austin who had a push push style of managememnt but Cowley (S Oxford) was originally Morris who believed in looking after staff. Longbridge's assembly was apparently poor quality, had loads of strikes and is now demolished. Cowley still exists as part of BMW (German) and makes the new Mini. They did not work well as a combined company (British Leyland) because they needed running differently (regardless of which way you think is correct).

I wonder what the Derby site was like in BREL days and is like now (it is Bombardier after belonging to ABB ?). Other companies in Europe did not have to put up with years of empty order books while the Railway was messed about with by Politicians. You have to pay for flexibility - a company cannot make skilled labour redundant and then re-emply is at short notice a few years later. We British DESTROY our own chances. We are run be non-technical people who dont know what logic is and ridicule Engineers. In Britain an engineering firm is likely to have directors who have non-tecnical degrees like Business Studies. In Germany an Engineering firm has directors who are TIME SERVED ENGINEERING GRADUATES.

I wonder how much Derby is benefitting from Canadian (?) shareholders and ethos. Its probably better off than just after its BREL days but how long does it take to change while coping with start-stop demand. So dont knock it unless you are a GOOD customer OR can afford to pay Derby's dole bill.

 

[YesToHS2]

What would it take to modify the northern WCML to European loading gauge?

It would be almost impossible to say.

If we work on the basis that a new bridge (road/rail) cost betweens £10m - £60. And lets say there are only 100 bridges you easily get to say £3bn to replace bridges alone. And then all the tunnels you would have to re-bore. You could easily be talking way over £10bn to upgrade the entire WCML to GC loading gauge. Even so the WCML would still only have a maximum speed of 140mph on the straights even with ERTMS.

 

[MCR247]

Carefull.

Siemens are having well publicised teething problems with their 380s for Scotland. Alsthom were completely useless with aftermarket support for the 175s, 180s and 458s when they came into service, does that count as a French company or a subsidiary in Britain. The French would not buy from abroad and fight to protect their own industry. The French, ALLEGEDLY, also massage the their availability figures. The Germans just happen to be damn good engineers.

And Bombardier did really well with the 377/5s, and are doing brilliantly with the 172s aren't they? The 09ts isn't working too well atm either OR you are in one of the crowded areas waiting depending on a unit cascade that keeps getting pushed back by them

So dont knock it unless you are a GOOD customer OR can afford to pay Derby's dole bill.

OR you are a commuter affected by their crap trains

 

[jopsuk]

What would it take to modify the northern WCML to European loading gauge?

If you altered the platforms of the northern WCML to allow GB+/GC (the difference here is maximum height), what would you do about local trains that use the same platforms, having lowered them and moved the edge further from the rail?

There are almost no self-contained networks in the UK. At Crewe you've got Virgin, LM, ATW, XC, EMT, Northern. You've got fTPE, Scotrail and even East Coast using parts of the Northern WCML. It is only the London commuter TOCs, barring LM, that DON'T use parts of the "northern" WCML in some way.