Crewe Hub

[The Planner]

They will know what trains they want by the end of 2017 and will be out procuring, will bet money on it. They will test them on the existing network to get the fault free miles too.

 

[Camden]

They aim to have classic compatible train services running to all Scotland, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester by 2026 (on full High Speed track only up to Lichfield/Crewe).

They will need more trains by 2033 when the line through Sheffield opens, but even here some of these will be classic compatible for services to Newcastle. Possible even all services re Sheffield wanting a city centre station rather than an out of town one.

My bet is that track being built to European gauge is just spending our money on box ticking because European law compels them to build to European gauge. Considering forward what they will need to run and when, and the options to cascade stock down, the fact that there will be nowhere (in the country) to cascade the full European gauge trains to, my bet is that full gauge trains won't ever be used, and that the High Speed fleet will be entirely "classic compatible" (ie normal sized) regardless of the track it runs on.

 

[Ianno87]

They aim to have classic compatible train services running to all Scotland, Birmingham, Liverpool and Manchester by 2026 (on full High Speed track only up to Lichfield/Crewe).

They will need more trains by 2033 when the line through Sheffield opens, but even here some of these will be classic compatible for services to Newcastle. Possible even all services re Sheffield wanting a city centre station rather than an out of town one.

My bet is that track being built to European gauge is just spending our money on box ticking because European law compels them to build to European gauge. Considering forward what they will need to run and when, and the options to cascade stock down, the fact that there will be nowhere (in the country) to cascade the full European gauge trains to, my bet is that full gauge trains won't ever be used, and that the High Speed fleet will be entirely "classic compatible" (ie normal sized) regardless of the track it runs on.

I think the idea is that the Classic Compatible sets used on Euston-Manchester in Phase 1 and 1A (operating on the existing network north of Handsacre Jn/Crewe respectively) are then diverted to work Phase 2 services (e.g. Euston-Newcastle). Euston-Manchester is then worked by additional Captive sets.

That way, no Classic Compatible sets required in Phase 1 are redundant in Phase 2 (and I would imagine it is aspired to have a single build of Classic Compatible sets for Phase 1, that is then sufficient to cover the Phase 2 requirement without the need for a follow-on build)

 

[edwin_m]

My bet is that track being built to European gauge is just spending our money on box ticking because European law compels them to build to European gauge. Considering forward what they will need to run and when, and the options to cascade stock down, the fact that there will be nowhere (in the country) to cascade the full European gauge trains to, my bet is that full gauge trains won't ever be used, and that the High Speed fleet will be entirely "classic compatible" (ie normal sized) regardless of the track it runs on.

Effectively the "captive" fleet will be part of the European train market. They can be off-the-shelf designs of whatever is available at the time, and if necessary they could be cascaded to other lines in Europe if no longer required in the UK. Even some non-European lines look like adopting the same technical specification, such as those proposed for California.

The trains may all be classic compatible (at least the initial order) if that's the most cost-effeictive approach, but it won't be influenced by the possibility of cascade to other UK routes, because they will be overspecified for classic services that don't need to use HS2.

 

[deltic]

Any news on how Crewe Hub proposals are progressing?

 

[yorksrob]

Given that Crewe station is already a long way away from Crewe itself and this 'hub' is supposed to be even further South from the town, hopefully it's been placed in the 'circular' file where it belongs.

 

[The Planner]

There is more than one option for the hub, autumn statement announcement I would expect. As for the current station being too far from the town centre, they have had the best part of 180 years to do something about it.

 

[yorksrob]

There is more than one option for the hub, autumn statement announcement I would expect. As for the current station being too far from the town centre, they have had the best part of 180 years to do something about it.

But at least they haven't made it worse (yet).

 

[Chester1]

Crewe town centre is actually in the north west corner of the town which has expanded in a disorganised way. Cheshire East Council have drawn up plans for a new town centre on the site of the current station and neighbouring low value land. They would prefer for the HS2 station to be just south of the current station and not a couple of miles south (another option). I think its the best idea.

 

[NotATrainspott]

One of the main justifications for putting the Crewe Hub south of the existing station is that it can then be south of the tunnel portal, so it would be feasible for HS2 captive trains to call at Crewe on their way to the North West. If the station is any further north, then expensive and complicated gauge-clearing would be required. While it might not be necessary for the Manchester-London trains to call, if Liverpool receives a captive spur it definitely will be necessary to allow those calls. In addition, there's the Manchester-Birmingham and Scotland-Birmingham services to consider, both of which really should call at Crewe for maximum connectivity.

 

[The Planner]

Nothing to stop you doing that anyway as you will have some sort of connection as part of 2A. The tunnel portal doesnt really matter.

 

[yorksrob]

Crewe town centre is actually in the north west corner of the town which has expanded in a disorganised way. Cheshire East Council have drawn up plans for a new town centre on the site of the current station and neighbouring low value land. They would prefer for the HS2 station to be just south of the current station and not a couple of miles south (another option). I think its the best idea.

So move the town centre next to the station, then move the station away.

Sounds like a lousy idea to me I'm afraid.

 

[BigVern]

Any news on how Crewe Hub proposals are progressing?

I have been advised that HS2 Ltd (or possibly Network Rail) have applied for a 'Certificate of Immunity' regarding the existing Crewe Station site.
This would "preclude the local planning authority ... from serving a building preservation notice in relation to it" for 5 years - plenty of time to knock it all down.

I understand there is opposition to this application.

Whilst I am quick to criticise the state of the current station (leaking roofs, unfinished works etc.), I do appreciate that some of the buildings are very old and may have historical significance.

I'm sure the designers of the new hub station will not want to be constrained by listed buildings in the middle of the new track layout, but they should take into account Crewe's railway heritage.

 

[edwin_m]

I don't believe the Crewe buildings are currently listed, which surprises me somewhat as it suggests that although parts of them are very old they aren't considered to be of great historical value. A possible reason is that the original buildings, though still visible, have been greatly altered over the years and are in nothing like their original context.

However, if someone decides they are worth preserving then NR would rather know this up front than have something slapped on them when the planning is well advanced send them right back to the drawing board. Presumably the very fact of this Order being applied for allows someone else to get in first if they so wish. On recent electrification schemes NR has worked with English Heritage to identify structures worth listing so they can be taken into account in planning the scheme.

 

[yorksrob]

I have been advised that HS2 Ltd (or possibly Network Rail) have applied for a 'Certificate of Immunity' regarding the existing Crewe Station site.
This would "preclude the local planning authority ... from serving a building preservation notice in relation to it" for 5 years - plenty of time to knock it all down.

I understand there is opposition to this application.

Whilst I am quick to criticise the state of the current station (leaking roofs, unfinished works etc.), I do appreciate that some of the buildings are very old and may have historical significance.

I'm sure the designers of the new hub station will not want to be constrained by listed buildings in the middle of the new track layout, but they should take into account Crewe's railway heritage.

It was looking rather tidy and well kept when I visited it a couple of years ago. Certainly better than in the late 90's when I used to use it regularly.

It would be a great shame if it went.

 

[Chester1]

So move the town centre next to the station, then move the station away.

Sounds like a lousy idea to me I'm afraid.

Under the councils proposals the HS2 station would be on the southern boundary of the new town centre. Its not a lousy idea, it would mean a much shorter walk from station to town centre and a town centre that was at the geographic centre of the town not in a corner. The area next to the current centre is very run down and therefore the best and easiest part of Crewe to redevelop.

 

[yorksrob]

Under the councils proposals the HS2 station would be on the southern boundary of the new town centre. Its not a lousy idea, it would mean a much shorter walk from station to town centre and a town centre that was at the geographic centre of the town not in a corner. The area next to the current centre is very run down and therefore the best and easiest part of Crewe to redevelop.

In the meantime, the rest of the town will be even further away from the station and fall further into decline.

Even with the redevelopment, the current station location is in the geographical heart of what would be the urban area.

Then there's the little matter of the current station actually being where the railway lines meet - which is kind of what the station exists for, or so I'm led to believe.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Nothing to stop you doing that anyway as you will have some sort of connection as part of 2A. The tunnel portal doesnt really matter.

The current plans do not allow northbound trains calling at Crewe to re-join HS2. This puts a hard limit on the number of HS2 trains that can call at Crewe and means that there can't be a high speed connection between Crewe and Manchester Airport or Piccadilly. If the HS2 station were built north of the tunnel portal, the only way to allow HS2 trains to rejoin the mainline would be to either gauge-clear the WCML or build a new pair of tracks, presumably having to be in tunnel to avoid the junctions and structures out to the northern portal of the mainline tunnel. Therefore, it would be very expensive and disruptive.

Given that the various involved bodies have had the idea of moving Crewe station south for a long time, it presents a reasonable solution to this conundrum. The station can be built just south of the mainline tunnel portal, like the Manchester Airport station. Since the tracks between the platforms and the mainline are low speed they can have much smaller vertical curve radii and larger gradients than are permitted for the mainline. This means that the platforms don't have to be as far south as the point where the mainline is on the level.

 

[The Planner]

You assume that a connection at the north end is off the table. I doubt that very much as most of it is still up for grabs as the hybrid bill for 2A is still embryonic.

 

[najaB]

Then there's the little matter of the current station actually being where the railway lines meet - which is kind of what the station exists for, or so I'm led to believe.

Isn't the plan to move the station to roughly where the current freight yard is? If so the connections to the north are still available, and the Stoke and Shrewsbury connections can be maintained with relatively short chords.

 

[yorksrob]

Isn't the plan to move the station to roughly where the current freight yard is? If so the connections to the north are still available, and the Stoke and Shrewsbury connections can be maintained with relatively short chords.

The maps I've seen show the proposed station site as being south of the junction, although things may have moved on I suppose.

 

[edwin_m]

Then there's the little matter of the current station actually being where the railway lines meet - which is kind of what the station exists for, or so I'm led to believe.

The junctions right at both ends of the platforms are also the reason why the present station is an operational pain, with low-speed conflicting moves over flat junctions and some routes having access to only a limited number of platforms. A station in the Basford Hall area would still allow access towards Shrewsbury via the southern connecting curve, but a new route would be needed towards Kidsgrove. The area of the existing station could then be used to provide a much faster, possibly grade-separated, junction for the Manchester and Chester routes.

Previous plans for a Crewe Hub (before HS2) suggested a new station should be provided on the Chester line to serve the town centre. I'm not sure if that is still being considered.

 

[Train jaune]

Been wondering what's happening about Crewe as it's all been very qioet from HS2 and the Government. My preference would be new station at Basford and retain Nantwich road as a far smaller station for local stoppers. Is that in amy way feasible?

 

[edwin_m]

Been wondering what's happening about Crewe as it's all been very qioet from HS2 and the Government. My preference would be new station at Basford and retain Nantwich road as a far smaller station for local stoppers. Is that in amy way feasible?

I doubt they will do that because the Nantwich Road station would be right in the middle of the new junction they would lay to give faster and less conflicting access to the Chester and Manchester lines. The same probably applies if the oldest buildings can't be removed.

 

[MarkyT]

I did a sketch a while back illustrating some potential new station sites and connecting lines around a new hub site:

http://www.townend.me/files/crewehub.pdf

Manchester - Shrewsbury axis trains would have to reverse at the new hub without the new Nantwich link shown. Reversal might add 5 minutes plus to the journey time even if done very slickly as at Bradford Interchange and Sheffield, but would the TOC on that route be interested? Would they be likely to miss out the call altogether on all or some trains to avoid the time penalty?

 

[najaB]

I did a sketch a while back illustrating some potential new station sites and connecting lines around a new hub site..

Is there a specific reason for the 'Manchester link' - seems a pretty sharp curve? Why not just leave on the existing line?



Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

 

[MarkyT]

Is there a specific reason for the 'Manchester link' - seems a pretty sharp curve? Why not just leave on the existing line?

Well it's all purely suggestions, but the Manchester Link would allow local trains to serve the new local station at the Earle Street Bridge near the county courts, library and market, i.e the administrative and and commercial centre of the old town.

The curve from the Winsford Line would be in excess of 400m radius so not particularly restrictive for local traffic.

 

[edwin_m]

Manchester - Shrewsbury axis trains would have to reverse at the new hub without the new Nantwich link shown. Reversal might add 5 minutes plus to the journey time even if done very slickly as at Bradford Interchange and Sheffield, but would the TOC on that route be interested? Would they be likely to miss out the call altogether on all or some trains to avoid the time penalty?

Because these trains can only use two platforms at Crewe today and conflict with every other through train using the station, I think you'll find their timetable padding in the Crewe area amounts to at least as much time as would be needed for a reversal, so I don't see the "Nantwich link" happening. I agree also with najaB that Manchester link isn't necessary either - by demolishing the existing station it should be possible to build a new junction which can be taken at close to the speeds the trains will be doing anyway when accelerating/decelerating for a stop at the Hub.

I can't imagine any operator of classic passenger trains not wishing to stop at Crewe, given the number of connectional opportunities to/from both HS2 and other classic services. The only passenger trains that don't stop at present will be largely replaced by HS2 services anyway.

 

[MarkyT]

Because these trains can only use two platforms at Crewe today and conflict with every other through train using the station, I think you'll find their timetable padding in the Crewe area amounts to at least as much time as would be needed for a reversal, so I don't see the "Nantwich link" happening

I can see there is probably some pathing time incorporated for the complex flat junctions through Crewe, but:

1. The size of Crewe allows other trains stopping there and going elsewhere to use different platforms and weave around the Manchester <-> Nantwich trains whilst they are calling at pl. #5 and #6.

2. Calling at Crewe consists of two separate movements.
a) An arrival in either direction which doesn't block the other direction at all and leaves the centre through roads clear in both directions.
b) A departure which blocks the through roads in both directions and arrivals from some routes in the opposite direction.

All in all quite flexible and resilient.

A replacement call and reversal at the Hub via the south facing chord would require crossing the throat of the largest and busiest yard in the whole freiqht complex, including its north end shunting neck. A new flyover could avoid this, but then the price differential compared to my Nantwich Link idea would start to erode, and the Nantwich Link could also incorporate a south end flyover of the entire layout to get trains on the Manchester side of the hub station, and at least across all the freight lines , hence simplifying junctions to the north of the hub and through the old station site.

I agree also with najaB that Manchester link isn't necessary either - by demolishing the existing station it should be possible to build a new junction which can be taken at close to the speeds the trains will be doing anyway when accelerating/decelerating for a stop at the Hub.

The Manchester Link is envisaged for local trains to call at a new 'Crewe central' station, a 'planning gain' proposal to counter the loss of the current site and replace it with something perhaps more useful for local services, including the Nantwich line services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At Phase 2A and prior to Phase 2B it is not possible to send Double-Decker trains onwards.

It can be expected that operating costs (and therefore fares) on Double-Decker trains will be a fraction of costs on classic-compatible trains.

No it can't. A double deck train UIC gauge train can take at most 1.5 times the passengers of a single deck train of the same length - at that multiplier it will be extremely cramped. 1.3 times is a more sensible figure. It's insignificant.