Crewe Hub

[The Planner]

Tenner says Stoke gets nothing and I reckon gorgeous George will say something sooner rather than later about going to Crewe. Dont reckon you will get any splitting or joining at Crewe either, Preston or further north for that.

 

[Altnabreac]

Tenner says Stoke gets nothing and I reckon gorgeous George will say something sooner rather than later about going to Crewe. Dont reckon you will get any splitting or joining at Crewe either, Preston or further north for that.

Splitting 1tph south of Preston was in the draft HS2 indicative service pattern. Albeit the somewhat bizarre plan of splitting a Liverpool and a Birmingham service at Birmingham Interchange.

Reckon Crewe makes more sense than that and there will be pressure to run as many 400m trains as possible into Euston. Currently the draft HS2 Phase 2 service pattern has 5tph 200m Classic Compatible, 3tph 400m Classic Compatible and 8 tph 400m Captive Sets.

Splitting / joining at Crewe could reduce that to 3tph 200m sets.

 

[The Planner]

Until HS2 goes north of Crewe and the tunnel opens then you are going to need 4 seperate HS2 platforms regardless, I just cant see you mixing the traffic up.

 

[Camden]

According to a demand report adding another 200 metre train at Crewe to Liverpool trains was spoken of as a fudge way of possibly dealing with the fact that the Liverpool trains are forecast to be so overcrowded as a single unit. Bear in mind there only recently a DfT letter spoke about long distance trains being more than 60% full feeling overcrowded, the forecast for these is over 80% on avg. So in all likelihood splitting and joining Liverpool trains at Crewe is out unless they can run into London as 600 metres long.

I gather that Scottish trains will already be joined up to 400 metres, splitting to go to Edinburgh and Glasgow. A possibility could be a train via Stoke on Trent, but then where would it split and join and with what and to what end.

 

[BigVern]

The government will be making an announcement for the phase 2 route before the end of the year.

My notes on yesterday's announcement:

1; Although the line will be built as far as Crewe, there is no mention of trains stopping at Crewe.
2; No new station at Crewe was announced, so the Cheshire East Council press release was totally misleading.
3; If the HS2s to Manchester use the Crewe route they will take paths on the existing line - it's VHF all over again.

 

[The Planner]

If they are going to spend billions on getting it to Crewe, they will stop at Crewe be assured of that. Crewe station was never going to have been part of that announcement, that will be later on. As for a timetable, nothing is set in stone yet.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

My notes on yesterday's announcement:
1; Although the line will be built as far as Crewe, there is no mention of trains stopping at Crewe.
2; No new station at Crewe was announced, so the Cheshire East Council press release was totally misleading.
3; If the HS2s to Manchester use the Crewe route they will take paths on the existing line - it's VHF all over again.

The options for Crewe are in the next phase of planning by David Higgins, reporting in 2016.
The report does cover what these options are.
The DfT also still prefers the location of Manchester Airport and Piccadilly stations, and a route to Golborne, in the "Full Y".
A train depot at Golborne is however less certain after local opposition. Maybe that would be at Crewe instead.
Stoke's MP has already grumbled about the omission of Stoke but there's no possibility of that being revisited:
https://www.gov.uk/government/speec...-question-regarding-route-and-station-choices

 

[CdBrux]

From what I read then the proposed Crewe hub would be considered as well as a rebuild of / near the existing station - decision Autumn 2016.

 

[The Ham]

Crewe is also being discussed here with regards to having HS2 phase 2a getting there the year after Phase 1 is due finished.

The "cost" of getting HS2 to Crewe is fairly minimal in that there was due to be a line there (or at least near to there) anyway and there was due to be a station somewhere near there. As such it then comes down to what changes are needed to accommodate it over the alternatives and how much extra or less they cost.

Also by being able to run HS2 trains to Crewe sooner than there is scope to sell tickets sooner meaning that income goes up sooner allowing the cost of the works to be paid back sooner (or at least to allow less money to be borrowed to complete the works).

 

[D6975]

An interesting scheme, but:

a) the curve in from the Shrewsbury line looks very tight!
b) four 'local' stations in the Crewe area seems overgenerous! And what would call there?
c) your link from the Liverpool line to the Sandbach line goes straight through an SSSI!

regarding a) If there's room, a Nuneaton style flyover would be a better option for the Salop line, does away with conflictions with the main quite nicely. You could even have the platforms at an angle above the main platforms, rather than to the east of them.

 

[BigVern]

3; If the HS2s to Manchester use the Crewe route they will take paths on the existing line - it's VHF all over again.

To answer my third point the command paper says this:

4.26
When the third service is re-routed via Crewe there is an increased chance of possible congestion on the line between Crewe and Manchester, and more detailed work is required to fully understand the impacts.
On a conservative basis, we have therefore assumed that:
• all three services to Manchester would have a journey time saving of nine minutes (instead of 13)
• additional infrastructure costs of up to £200 million (in 2011 prices) would be required to facilitate this routing

So what can be done with a £200 million magic wand?
More passing loops like at Chelford?
4-tracking Sandbach to Wilmslow?

 

[6Gman]

To answer my third point the command paper says this:

4.26
When the third service is re-routed via Crewe there is an increased chance of possible congestion on the line between Crewe and Manchester, and more detailed work is required to fully understand the impacts.
On a conservative basis, we have therefore assumed that:
• all three services to Manchester would have a journey time saving of nine minutes (instead of 13)
• additional infrastructure costs of up to £200 million (in 2011 prices) would be required to facilitate this routing

So what can be done with a £200 million magic wand?
More passing loops like at Chelford?
4-tracking Sandbach to Wilmslow?

Not sure loops like Chelford are much use - by the time trains have slowed for the access points and then accelerated out again they may as well have kept going!

Quadrupling Sandbach - Wilmslow would be ... interesting :- a chunk of George Osborne's constituency ... and the viaduct over the Dane at Holmes Chapel!

And you still have the pinchpoint at Cheadle Hulme.

 

[edwin_m]

Anything that is done between Crewe and Cheadle Hulme would either have to pay for itself in the six years between Phase 2a and Phase 2b when the high speed trains disappear from this route, or be of longer-term use after 2b happens.

 

[The Ham]

Anything that is done between Crewe and Cheadle Hulme would either have to pay for itself in the six years between Phase 2a and Phase 2b when the high speed trains disappear from this route, or be of longer-term use after 2b happens.

There's talk that Phase 2 may have multiple opening dates, so it may well be that the bit after Crewe may not take as long as 6 years before it is open.

 

[Greybeard33]

To answer my third point the command paper says this:

4.26
When the third service is re-routed via Crewe there is an increased chance of possible congestion on the line between Crewe and Manchester, and more detailed work is required to fully understand the impacts.
On a conservative basis, we have therefore assumed that:
• all three services to Manchester would have a journey time saving of nine minutes (instead of 13)
• additional infrastructure costs of up to £200 million (in 2011 prices) would be required to facilitate this routing

So what can be done with a £200 million magic wand?
More passing loops like at Chelford?
4-tracking Sandbach to Wilmslow?

Maybe the £200m would be spent on gauge clearance work, to enable the container trains to/from Trafford Park to be rerouted via Stockport, Altrincham, Northwich and Middlewich to Sandbach, instead of going via Styal and Wilmslow? Thereby freeing up an hourly path between Piccadilly and Crewe via Styal. Figure 6.4 in the 2007 Freight RUS showed Sandbach to Stockport via Northwich as part of the "industry's aspiration" for a UIC GB+ gauge route from the Channel Tunnel to Manchester and Leeds.

 

[edwin_m]

Maybe the £200m would be spent on gauge clearance work, to enable the container trains to/from Trafford Park to be rerouted via Stockport, Altrincham, Northwich and Middlewich to Sandbach, instead of going via Styal and Wilmslow? Thereby freeing up an hourly path between Piccadilly and Crewe via Styal. Figure 6.4 in the 2007 Freight RUS showed Sandbach to Stockport via Northwich as part of the "industry's aspiration" for a UIC GB+ gauge route from the Channel Tunnel to Manchester and Leeds.

This is superficially attractive but the Up train would have to cross the main lines twice between Manchester and Edgeley Junction, which probably uses up more capacity than would be freed up by Styal.

I assume from all this that Port Salford (which would have rail access via Chat Moss) isn't going to replace the Trafford terminals.

 

[Greybeard33]

This is superficially attractive but the Up train would have to cross the main lines twice between Manchester and Edgeley Junction, which probably uses up more capacity than would be freed up by Styal.

I assume from all this that Port Salford (which would have rail access via Chat Moss) isn't going to replace the Trafford terminals.

I would expect they would use the Up Fast from Slade Lane to Edgeley, rather than cross to the Slow and back again. Less obstructive than the current waste, biomass and coal trains, which all have to cross the entire layout between Heaton Norris and Edgeley, in both directions. Post Ordsall Chord, I think Cheadle Hulme Junction will become the worst bottleneck - already 9tph each way on a double track line, criss-crossing a flat junction, and an extra hourly service to Macclesfield in the Northern ITT. If the third HS service to Manchester could use the freight path via Styal, it would avoid Cheadle Hulme.

The problem with the western exit from Port Salford is that it would increase congestion on the WCML (at least until HS2 reaches Golborne). I think some freight might need to use the Sandbach - Middlewich - Northwich - Hartford route to avoid the double track section through Winsford - again, W12 gauge clearance required.

 

[po8crg]

The Styal route precludes stopping at Stockport, doesn't it?

I suppose that the need to reverse means no chance of calling at the airport (and the platforms probably aren't long enough anyway), so that means a Manchester train that is non-stop to Crewe,

 

[Greybeard33]

The Styal route precludes stopping at Stockport, doesn't it?

I suppose that the need to reverse means no chance of calling at the airport (and the platforms probably aren't long enough anyway), so that means a Manchester train that is non-stop to Crewe,

Platforms 3 & 4 at the Airport are 200 & 201m, so should be just long enough for a 200m Classic Compatible. The platforms at Wilmslow are plenty long enough.

At present the one Pendolino per hour via Crewe stops at both Stockport and Wilmslow. With three Classic Compatibles per hour via Crewe, maybe it would be acceptable for one to skip Wilmslow and stop at the Airport, if one of the others stopped at both Wilmslow and Stockport and the third just at Stockport?

 

[Altnabreac]

Tenner says Stoke gets nothing and I reckon gorgeous George will say something sooner rather than later about going to Crewe. Dont reckon you will get any splitting or joining at Crewe either, Preston or further north for that.

Now far be it from me to question your infallibility but I noticed this interesting tidbit buried deep in the Phase 2a announcement:

5.17 As mentioned, Staffordshire will see the benefit of HS2, with classic-compatible trains scheduled to stop in Stafford under Phase One. We do however recognise the important role Stoke-on-Trent plays in the wider economic sub-region and welcome the way Stoke-on-Trent City Council, Cheshire East Council and other partners are working together to ensure that the benefits of HS2 are maximised. We want to see whether Stoke-on-Trent and Macclesfield could receive HS2 services as part of Phase Two and therefore the Secretary of State has asked HS2 Limited to explore how we might best serve Stoke-on-Trent and Macclesfield, including through classic compatible trains via the Handsacre Junction. Initial modelling suggests this could give journey times from Stoke to London of a little over an hour – a significant improvement on the current 84 minutes journey time. Any HS2 services would also likely be supplemented by continued classic rail services.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...chment_data/file/480712/hs2-east-and-west.pdf p66

Shows that a Manchester - Stockport - Macclesfield - Stoke - HS2 via Handsacre service is at least being considered by the powers that be.

I've long thought something along these lines would be proposed as a political sop to Staffordshire.

 

[The Planner]

That is superb wordsmithing (which probably isn't a word), "explore" "best serve". Explore = have a quick look but bin it. Best Serve = Lots of trains from Stoke to Crewe that connect. Any HS2 services would likely be supplemented by continued classic services = You might get 2tpd in the peaks....

 

[Altnabreac]

That is superb wordsmithing (which probably isn't a word), "explore" "best serve". Explore = have a quick look but bin it. Best Serve = Lots of trains from Stoke to Crewe that connect. Any HS2 services would likely be supplemented by continued classic services = You might get 2tpd in the peaks....

Agreed re the flakyness (also not a word?) of the commitment.

But seeing as I've talked you up from nothing to 2tpd I'll send you my address for the tenner...

 

[The Planner]

I said might, thats not a commitment on the railway!

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

That is superb wordsmithing (which probably isn't a word), "explore" "best serve". Explore = have a quick look but bin it. Best Serve = Lots of trains from Stoke to Crewe that connect. Any HS2 services would likely be supplemented by continued classic services = You might get 2tpd in the peaks....

"Might" also covers "might not"!

Would I be right in thinking there is no plan to run classic-compatible trains off the wires?
So no Shrewsbury/Chester/North Wales services on HS2 without more wiring?
All the tables of journey time reductions carefully omit these places.

 

[Altnabreac]

"Might" also covers "might not"!

Would I be right in thinking there is no plan to run classic-compatible trains off the wires?
So no Shrewsbury/Chester/North Wales services on HS2 without more wiring?
All the tables of journey time reductions carefully omit these places.

There are 2 things that HS2 Ltd hate:

1. Unproven technologies
2. Upgrades to the existing network being assigned to HS2 budget either officially or second hand by people like the IEA.

A hybrid powered Classic Compatible high speed train that can run on non electrified lines does not currently exist. In theory you could build one but there is no way HS2 Ltd will advocate anything which isn't an off the shelf offering.

Equally HS2 Ltd make no commitments of running any services anywhere that is not currently electrified to avoid these costs being assigned to HS2.

This does not mean that currently non electrified destinations could not receive HS2 trains in future if they were electrified by the time HS2 was built.

A few destinations that could well be wired by the time HS2 is built and might receive HS2 services would be:
Chester
Blackpool
Hull
Aberdeen
Inverness
Sunderland
Middlesbrough
Harrogate

A few more destinations might be possible but would need additional chords to access HS2 that are not included in current plans:
Sheffield
Doncaster
Leicester
Shrewsbury
Bristol

However don't expect to see any of these places in HS2 plans until the work is finished. Probably the most likely of these to feature in official HS2 plans would be Blackpool as an extension of the Preston service (with alternate 2 hourly trains to Lancaster), once the wires at Blackpool North appear.

Only thing HS2 Ltd might not like would be if platform lengthening was needed that might be assigned to them?

As HS2 moves from the might happen stage to the is happening stage politicians will become more interested in how their area can benefit. I'd expect the number of potential destinations to start creeping up at that point.

An extension of HS2 services from Preston to Blackpool / Lancaster would effectively serve 5 constituencies including 3 ultra marginals...

 

[po8crg]

A hybrid powered Classic Compatible high speed train that can run on non electrified lines does not currently exist.

There is the Alvia 730, which isn't Classic-Compatible with the GB classic network, but is with the Spanish classic network, which is even trickier to work with than the GB network, as it involves a gauge change.

I'm pretty sure that Talgo could come up with something that would work with the GB classic network if asked to do so, but it would certainly be expensive - and most of the likely destinations (Hull, Chester, Aberdeen, Inverness, Holyhead) are on an electrification plan somewhere, so, even if that electrification isn't complete by 2033, it would be hard to justify buying a hybrid train that would have a lifetime limited by the arrival of the wires. Far better to include an option for more pure-electric classic-compatibles on that contract and then order the additional trains as the routes get electrified.

 

[HowardGWR]

....................
This does not mean that currently non electrified destinations could not receive HS2 trains in future if they were electrified by the time HS2 was built.

A few more destinations might be possible but would need additional chords to access HS2 that are not included in current plans:
Sheffield
Doncaster
Leicester
Shrewsbury
Bristol

I have seen this reference to Bristol before, in connection with what is meant here. Are we referring to CC trains from Bristol somehow getting onto HS2 (north)? If so, where would be your favourite joining point? Why not from Cardiff?

 

[po8crg]

I have seen this reference to Bristol before, in connection with what is meant here. Are we referring to CC trains from Bristol somehow getting onto HS2 (north)? If so, where would be your favourite joining point? Why not from Cardiff?

If Bristol-Birmingham gets electrified in the future, then a junction onto HS2 in the Birmingham area would likely be part of the electrification project.



That would allow for trains from the North to Birmingham to continue on to Bristol. The most obvious service would be Newcastle because it's a CC train, and captives wouldn't be able to get to Bristol.



As for Cardiff or even Swansea, there's no good reason to think that couldn't be done, but we might have electrified to Exeter or Plymouth by then, so we tend to say "Bristol and beyond" because it could be either direction.

 

[The Planner]

Extremely unlikely to happen, would need to check but I dont think its in the hybrid bill either.

 

[po8crg]

It's not in the bill. It's not in for a very good reason - it would be completely useless unless Bristol-Birmingham is electrified and that's not going to happen until the 2030s. But it would make a lot of sense to add the junction in when the electrification happens, because then you can do Bristol-Newcastle in about 3 hours.