Wait, 18tph to Birmingham? That's crazy... I'm assuming that includes those to Leeds, but since that's cancelled, how many trains will there be?
Interchange, not Curzon St and they wouldn't all stop. It will be 10tph I expect.
Ah thanks. Yes sorry, interchange, I meant that but I got too excited XD.
No better than what the current WCML can do if/when the second Liverpool starts and potentially an open access operator.
Ah right, thanks
Interesting, thank you!
The fast line option makes very little difference to it. Its also hideously expensive and disruptive to build. There is also still no plan to speed up the up slow from Colwich either. Work is being done to create options for Colwich, but it will be just tinkering at the edges as it won't have an open cheque book.
I don't understand this, I've seen it a lot tho. Surely by having the trains enter Straight onto the fast tracks will save time than going onto the slow tracks and then switching. Also, surely by having a fast train enter the slow tracks every 15 odd minutes will reduce the capacity of the local and freight trains?
Don't assume the HS2 trains will be evenly spaced at Handsacre, they won't. The pointwork will be 100mph whichever solution is finally chosen, so no real difference. 7tph through Colwich will do the job of reducing the capacity anyway as everything will have to fit around them. Pathing a train out at Handsacre is no different to doing it at Colwich.
Ah, so theyll still enter the tracks at 100 mph but colwich is the real bottleneck?
They will fill it to the brim of whats possible from the start. Hence the issues of Colwich and the dregs that are left for the Trent Valley.
The real answer of course is to build phase 2a to Crewe, and keep the Handsacre link as currently planned. Assuming a change of government at the election, I'd still put money on that being the long term answer. As a very minimum, a Colwich by-pass needs to be built.
And any sane Government would do that as Phase 2a ease relatively easy construction, has the best payback, and actually does release the most capacity on the WCML overall. Which Handsacre doesn’t.
Shame if that is the case as apparently some smaller stations on the Stoke to Manchester via Macclesfield line were planned to get extra service calls thanks to HS2.
Those in Macclesfield, Stoke, Manchester, Leeds, ... will have opportunity to mourn their loss at the ballot box in the New Year; similarly those benefiting from cancellation of HS2....
They were due to be the only fast train to remain on the WCML. The fire regulations forbid diesel engines.
Attach a loco to an EMU at Crewe then.
What fire regs- where?
Oh if only there was time to order a new locomotive from Stadler or Siemens and make it autocoupler compatible with the HS2 units...
The fire safety systems in the HS2 tunnels in and near London have been designed without the need to accommodate diesel engine exhaust, which means the tunnel regulations won't permit those engines. As I understand it.
I'm guessing you mean 'no first stop Crewe / Warrington' fast rather than 'no intercity services south of Crewe on the existing route', since Coventry and Rugby would still need fast London services and Milton Keynes and Watford Birmingham / northwest services?
Thank you. That's potentially a bit limiting, but also incentivising regarding decarbonisation? So, no way through for heritage diesels then.
Ignoring the fact you could never path a crank tour on HS2, the loco would need ETCS fitment anyway.
