the engineering constraints are known to be perfectly solveable with enoygh money. Hence Bald Rick asking you about the capacity issue.
If we need to 'massively' expand capacity it is a perfectly sensible question to ask how much capacity a proposed intervention would add.
The UK already has public sector debt of about 100% of a year of UK GDP. Furthermore, it pays about 4-5% interest on long term borrowing.
In these circumstances this is a realistic assessment of how much capital investment can be financed at current levels of debt and interest rates.
It was here, and look what happened when there was a lot of imagination and ambition not sufficently rooted in engineering and financial reality.
I'm not an engineer either, but I have stood on the end of the platform at Kings Cross, looked at what I see, and tried to work out where it would be possible to add 4 new platforms, and how they might be constructed. I have also stood on the platform at Welwyn North, and in the valley below the Digswell Viaduct, and tried to work out where it would be possible to add 2 new tracks, and how they might be constructed. I have looked at construction sites for the Elizabeth Line and High Speed 2, and I have looked at the land where it is proposed to build East West Rail. Go and stand in those places, and see if it is all still obvious.
This is a railway forum, not an economics one. However, the ideas implied in your post - that our country does not face an economic problem and that "austerity" in the way George Osborne mis-used that word is the only way of tackling any such problem - are wrong.
A bit off topic, but this is a somewhat different issue. When the area around King Cross was redeveloped there was room to allow for some expansion, but the redevelopment followed the usual short termist goals, Some space should have been left at the west side of Kings Cross, and the large white building moved to the west by maybe 50-60 yds. This would then have made room from some more platforms in the future. Dont get me wrong, I used Kings Cross most weeks in the late 70s and ealy 80s and it was a dump, and the area immediately outside the station was not nice, anyone who used it back then will know what I mean. So the redevelopment is welcome, but it appears to have been carried out with no thought to future rail expansion. A shame that no one had the common sense to allow a bit of 'wiggle room'.
I agree this is definitely in the 'too difficult' category. Again if HS2 had progressed as originally planned the relief would have come as a lot of services for Leeds, York, and points North would use HS2. It is going to need a 'by-pass' line, and a quick look at the map says that will be probably 5-7 miles of brand new railway, to be built through (I think) 'green belt', so yes zero chance.
Physically building them would be straightforward, a parallel viaduct and tunnel don't appear technically difficult. Getting permission and finance to do it is a much bigger problem, it would likely need some expensive houses knocking down
Why? Done as an "X" it would still allow through trains and work better without the complications of needing so many grade-separated junctions.
doesn't this risk making Snow Hill redundant?
He didn't really cancel it though, did he?
Looks like your line might pass through Clevedon, which could do with a station of its own again, possibly subterranean given you’d be on the dip down to tunnel under the Bristol Channel.
Although some people have pushed the "plausible" element of the topic.
True, but two wrongs don't make a right.
How would no rockets from Altnabreac to Sugarloaf improve Scotland-Wales connectivity? Surely you'd need some ...
Realistic in a demand sense but not realistic in the current economic climate: I'll throw in the complete overhaul of the western approach to Haymarket and turning Edinburgh Airport into a Scottish Schipol.
or in any current climate-aware climate either! We need to reduce air travel by any means possible, and expanding any airport is absolutely incompatible with this.
Maybe tunnel some burrowing junctions to make rail operations easier (which is definitely infrastructure with no realistic chance of being built!) We want to see rail made better in lots of ways, but absolutely should not be pandering to air travel demand.
Would have been my suggestion as I doubt it will happen in my lifetime, and maybe never! I'll believe it when I see spades in the ground!
It was joined up at one time, and as you enter Piccadilly from Guide Bridge you can still see the remains of it.
Thanks, it's a very useful recourse that site! Also a loop there on to the main line southbound could take through trains from the NW "round the back via Victoria" and take some stress off the corridor. Means trains wouldn't call at Piccadilly 13/14 but they would at Victoria and give me my dream of a direct Bolton to London service although the current WCML would need improvements to cope with more services I suppose.
That does not apply to the debt interest, much of which is paid to overseas investors. Also it does not apply to the raw materials needed for construction, much of which have to be imported. Much of the staff wages disappear out of the UK too, spent on imported consumer goods and foreign holidays.
The debt being around 100% is significant because of the amount of interest that has to be paid. More outstanding debt means more interest payments. When the government is paying interest on its debt at 4-5% per annum that matters a lot.
Interesting that you suggest Brum to Wolvo but not Brum to Coventry which isn't that much further. Doing both would cover "Greater Birmingham", putting the West Midlands in the same language as is applied to Manchester and London.
This has long been a thought of mine, because there is land to add platforms 0, -1, -2 etc at Piccadilly.
‘Berne Gauge’ is now pre WW2 historical terminology, it’s ‘UIC GC‘ that these proposals usually go for and that is what has zero chance.
For piggbyback operations you'd only need UIC-GB+ and that's only about 30cm extra clearance in both directions against W10/12. However if a route in the UK is being built to UIC gauge for UIC-standard trains it'll need every platform to be able to be bypassed.
