HS2 if the Germans had planned it

[Bletchleyite]

An elevated travelator from St Pancras to Euston would be the obvious solution. Suspend the whole thing above Euston Road, also do the same in Birmingham to link New Street, Moor Street and Curzon Street.

Isn't there a plan for an underground one, or has that been dropped?

 

[zwk500]

Isn't there a plan for an underground one, or has that been dropped?

There's a plan for an underground link to Euston square tube station as part of HS2. Crossrail 2 are proposing to have entrances at both stations and would form a covered passage, but no funding, timescale or travelator though.

 

[The exile]

To all speculating about how the Germans would have done, all I say is "Stuttgart 21".

 

[PTR 444]

The first proper high speed line in Germany didn’t connect the country’s largest and second largest cities together*. In fact it served a relatively sparsely populated corridor between Hannover and Würzburg.

I expect if the UK was Germany, the Manchester - Crewe section would have been built first, including a spur to Liverpool from a Y junction in both directions. London to north of Birmingham would have followed, but with Brum on the direct route featuring a Stuttgart 21 style station beneath New Street instead of a spur ending at Curzon Street. The missing link as we now know as phase 2a would probably have been built much later than the initial sections.

*Interestingly, despite having direct ICE trains running between them, Berlin and Hamburg still aren’t linked by a purpose-built high speed line.

 

[Bald Rick]

Isn't there a plan for an underground one, or has that been dropped?

I think it was never more than the crayon stage. I’ve not seen any bona fide proposals for it in the last decade. Not least because there’s nowhere an underground link such as this can go and remain remotely usable.

 

[Ken H]

The first proper high speed line in Germany didn’t connect the country’s largest and second largest cities together*. In fact it served a relatively sparsely populated corridor between Hannover and Würzburg.

I expect if the UK was Germany, the Manchester - Crewe section would have been built first, including a spur to Liverpool from a Y junction in both directions. London to north of Birmingham would have followed, but with Brum on the direct route featuring a Stuttgart 21 style station beneath New Street instead of a spur ending at Curzon Street. The missing link as we now know as phase 2a would probably have been built much later than the initial sections.

*Interestingly, despite having direct ICE trains running between them, Berlin and Hamburg still aren’t linked by a purpose-built high speed line.

Berlin was in a different country before the wall came down. The railways had a major hub there till 1939. During partition they reconfigured to link the major cities in West Germany. Then the wall came down and the railways were all wrong again. Imagine the upheaval if SE England was suddenly in a different country with an iron curtain stopping most cross border travel. Thats what Germany had.
Also post WW2, Poland moved west and now occupies much of East Prussia. Amazingly todays Kaliningrad in Russia was Königsberg till 1945

 

[The exile]

The first proper high speed line in Germany didn’t connect the country’s largest and second largest cities together*. In fact it served a relatively sparsely populated corridor between Hannover and Würzburg.

I expect if the UK was Germany, the Manchester - Crewe section would have been built first, including a spur to Liverpool from a Y junction in both directions. London to north of Birmingham would have followed, but with Brum on the direct route featuring a Stuttgart 21 style station beneath New Street instead of a spur ending at Curzon Street. The missing link as we now know as phase 2a would probably have been built much later than the initial sections.

*Interestingly, despite having direct ICE trains running between them, Berlin and Hamburg still aren’t linked by a purpose-built high speed line.

It was plugging the most significant gap in West Germany’s network - north-south (ie Hannover - Munich). Berlin was still in enemy territory when the line was plannex

 

[Bald Rick]

The first proper high speed line in Germany didn’t connect the country’s largest and second largest cities together*. In fact it served a relatively sparsely populated corridor between Hannover and Würzburg.

That’s because it was specifically planned and constructed and opened (in part) by DB when it was West Germany, as part of a West a German network.

Construction started only 12 years after the Berlin Wall was built; it was fully opened only 18 months after the wall “fell”.

 

[william.martin]

HS2 if the Germans planned would have these differences:

• There would be no speed limit other than 99% of the time when there is because of the traffic (hint hint auto bahn)
• The trains would be very low to the ground because of the platform height.
• It would work because it's German and is engineered properly.
•To avoid moaning from anti - deforestation people, there would be single barrier 200mph crossings.

 

[zwk500]

• It would work because it's German and is engineered properly.

Berlin Brandenburg Airport and the New ICE teething problems suggest this is not a certainty.

 

[fandroid]

The Germans would probably not have expanded Euston by building a (very expensive) new station on the side. Yes might have lengthened some platforms, but would have diverted all the suburban and middle distance trains to a new underground tunnel and station to make room.

They would also probably have erected thousands of apartments for rent (not sold them), over the approaches, so they have good income stream for next 100+ years.

Most of those S-bahn lines that transfer the local and regional trains beneath major German stations are basically cut and cover tunnels. Impossible at Euston given the dogs breakfast of Tube lines under and nearby. At Stuttgart they've gone in for the whole HS2 city station project on steroids, with very long approaches in tunnel and high-speed platforms built below ground. And it's caused huge protests and is over budget and time by a long way.

 

[JamesT]

It would still be designed around serving London, Birmingham and Manchester. As far as Westminster is concerned, that's all that exists to them, and all that matters, and even then there's still a massive London bias.

They are the three largest urban areas in the UK. If you’re going to start building high speed lines, those are the obvious ones to base it around.

If they actually believed the stuff that comes out of their own mouth, like strengthening the union and levelling up the North, at the very least the GWML would be electrified to Cardiff, and Manchester would have a new rail tunnel through it going west to east, to help better connect the North.

Have you been asleep for a few years? The GWML is electrified to Cardiff.

 

[fandroid]

Germany did manage to build a high speed station at their main hub Airport, Frankfurt, and it's very well used. In contrast, Lufthansa's other hub, Munich, only has S-bahn connections and is a long way off any intercity line , let alone high-speed. The latter suffered from the Maglev delusion for many years and even had a mock-up Maglev train displayed between the two terminals for many years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2023 ==

To all speculating about how the Germans would have done, all I say is "Stuttgart 21".

It's completely bonkers but crazily impressive. I hope I'll get a chance to travel through Stuttgart on it before my regular trips to Ulm end.

 

[CdBrux]

Germany did manage to build a high speed station at their main hub Airport, Frankfurt, and it's very well used. In contrast, Lufthansa's other hub, Munich, only has S-bahn connections and is a long way off any intercity line , let alone high-speed. The latter suffered from the Maglev delusion for many years and even had a mock-up Maglev train displayed between the two terminals for many years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2023 ==


It's completely bonkers but crazily impressive. I hope I'll get a chance to travel through Stuttgart on it before my regular trips to Ulm end.

due for completion, at least for ICE trains part, in 2025... currently!

 

[Northumbriana]

I appreciate German urban redevelopment had great assistance from the RAF and USAF. The Cold War also froze redevelopment in Berlin to an extent not found elsewhere in Germany, particularly the west. However I still think Berlin HbF is an interesting contrast to HS2 particularly Curzon St.

HbF is a split level station with an low level section served by north-south lines that are in tunnels for a few km. Granted, the circumstances are different. The tunnels allowed Berlin HbF to become a major hub and also created through routes from lines that had once terminated in terminal stations (Anhalter Bahnhoff for example). The tunnels and low level platforms are used by long distance as well as regional services.

I think Curzon St is a mistake, particularly as makes connecting journeys more difficult than existing WCML services to New St. This is only partly offset by its proximity to Moor St. I cant help but think that some form of crossrail project for Birmingham would have relived some capacity at the existing New St Station and offered greater connectivity for longer distance, regional and local services that Curzon St will. Of course it would have been mightily expensive, probably more so than the existing branch off the HS2 core route into Birmingham, particularly if other capacity enhancements were delivered in tandem to tunnels, e.g Coventry to Birmingham 4 tracking.

I think a huge opportunity is being missed with Curzon Street and not upscaling it to Arup's Grand Central proposal.

As many platforms as you can fit with most of them being end of line platforms. Then a whole load of tracks heading East out of the station. Then the four tracks to New Street being limited to an expanded Cross City network, some regional and the hourly London to Glasgow service.

 

[The Planner]

I think a huge opportunity is being missed with Curzon Street and not upscaling it to Arup's Grand Central proposal.

As many platforms as you can fit with most of them being end of line platforms. Then a whole load of tracks heading East out of the station. Then the four tracks to New Street being limited to an expanded Cross City network, some regional and the hourly London to Glasgow service.

Would have cost a fortune and took twice as long to build.

 

[Senex]

Germany did manage to build a high speed station at their main hub Airport, Frankfurt, and it's very well used. In contrast, Lufthansa's other hub, Munich, only has S-bahn connections and is a long way off any intercity line , let alone high-speed. The latter suffered from the Maglev delusion for many years and even had a mock-up Maglev train displayed between the two terminals for many years.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2023 ==


It's completely bonkers but crazily impressive. I hope I'll get a chance to travel through Stuttgart on it before my regular trips to Ulm end.

Also main-line and S-Bahn were fully designed into the new Berlin airport (and the rail facilities were built on time and worked — unlike the chapter of disasters of the aiport itself!). The only thing still to be completed is the equivalent of Heathrow Express, and that is at last being worked on, having been delayed for years by the NIMBYs of Lichtenrade holding up the restoration of the Dresdener Bahn.

As for Stuttgart, probably the less said the better. I wonder if that whole business means that similar suggestions for Frankfurt/Main will now never see the light of day.

There's certainly much that is very good indeed about German railways, especially in ther period before Hartmut Mehdorn was in charge, but also a good deal in modern times that we surely wouldn't want emulate (like Stuttgart, or the massive signalling failure across North Germany not so long ago).

 

[Bald Rick]

I think a huge opportunity is being missed with Curzon Street and not upscaling it to Arup's Grand Central proposal.

As many platforms as you can fit with most of them being end of line platforms. Then a whole load of tracks heading East out of the station. Then the four tracks to New Street being limited to an expanded Cross City network, some regional and the hourly London to Glasgow service.

Would have cost a fortune and took twice as long to build.

And where’s the space for it?

 

[Matt P]

What did Arup's Grand Central proposals entail?

I've tried to find the report online but not even able to track down a copy.

 

[OVS Flatbottom]

What did Arup's Grand Central proposals entail?

I've tried to find the report online but not even able to track down a copy.

Try https://web.archive.org/web/20070927002445/http://www.arup.com/_assets/_download/download488.pdf.

(I found the link on this thread from Alon Levy's blog Pedestrian Observations: https://pedestrianobservations.com/...ional-traditions-of-building-high-speed-rail/.)

 

[Northumbriana]

Try https://web.archive.org/web/20070927002445/http://www.arup.com/_assets/_download/download488.pdf.

(I found the link on this thread from Alon Levy's blog Pedestrian Observations: https://pedestrianobservations.com/...ional-traditions-of-building-high-speed-rail/.)

Most notably, Britain has oversize stations, spending billions on new terminals such as in Birmingham. This comes from the low efficiency of most European turnaround operations, because most European cities have huge rail terminals from the steam era with a surplus of tracks. When trains need to turn fast, they do: German trains running through Frankfurt, which is a terminal, turn in 3-4 minutes to continue to their onward destination. In Tokyo, where space is at a premium, JR East learned to turn trains in 12 minutes even while giving them a cleaning, and with such tight operations, Britain should be able to fit traffic growth within existing station footprints.

Do European stations really have a surplus of tracks? I'm guessing that won't apply to the UK.

But in general, I think it behooves countries to learn to implement the following from those four traditions:

Japan: the best rolling stock, high-efficiency turnaround operations, reliable schedules; avoid excessive viaducts and Japan’s increasing demand for turnkey systems.
France: passenger-dedicated infrastructure standards (supplemented by Cologne-Frankfurt), land swap deals for at-grade construction, cost control (in the Spanish version – France is deteriorating); avoid TGV rolling stock and airline-style pricing.
Germany: takt (especially in the Swiss and Dutch versions), open station platforms, integration between timetable and infrastructure, seat turnover, decent rolling stock; avoid empowering NIMBYs and building mixed lines with freight.
China: separation of passenger and freight operations, very high average speeds; avoid airline-style outlying stations and excessive viaducts.

Interesting that they warn against TGV rolling stock.

Does Germany still operate their main ICE routes on a once every two hour frequency?