Look at a map, St Enoch station sits between Central and Queen Street and would provide access to the HS services from either of them. As to 400m trains, you might think they belong in 'cloud cuckoo land', but that's what will be running HS2.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Glasgow Central and associated infrastructure: Upgrades needed for HSR
- Thread starter Scotrail314209
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Strikes me that we will be lucky if HS2 manages to reach Birmingham. Can't really see the cash being there even for that bit.
So cloud cuckoo land sounds about right to me.
Scotrail314209
Established Member
I think it may be an issue with gradual climb in Post-COVID passenger numbers. But as HS2 is about 15 years away, there may well be a case for it. However, I agree with 92002 and doubt that there will be cash or justification for it to go any further north than Birmingham.
Personally, they should scrap the Nottingham and Leeds bit as they already get trains to London in a very steady time.
I think one of the issues with an Underground station is the Glasgow Subway and the Argyle and North Clyde Lines. Unless you were to do work underneath the Glasgow Subway tunnels, but closing off parts of the city will be an issue.
Personally, they should scrap the Nottingham and Leeds bit as they already get trains to London in a very steady time.
I think one of the issues with an Underground station is the Glasgow Subway and the Argyle and North Clyde Lines. Unless you were to do work underneath the Glasgow Subway tunnels, but closing off parts of the city will be an issue.
If the clowns in Whitehall continue to try and one-up the guys in Brussels, I can see that being the case. However, assuming that we get something close to normal trade from Jan 1st onwards then HS2 is a project with a 50 to 100 year payback time so there should be plenty enough long-term Government debt to pay for it.
Realistically, where would the Glasgow HSR terminus be located?
Edinburgh seems like it's a definite underground type solution, unless somebody is willing to get the cheque book out to drill two tunnels into the mound and under the castle, and rationalise the station layout. Glasgow seems a little less clear. St Enoch initially seeming sensible before considering the curves, and Central obviously being the prefferred option for connectivity - but with the added hastle of having to decide which adjacent street to bulldoze to make way for an extension.
I certainly can't imagine punters will be happy to see the four corners torn doon!
But then again, a new side extension to the west of Central for HSR would be a planning nightmare without a grade seperated crossover. Mind you, you could still build the west side extension to house a sizeable proportion of the regional services, and then rationalise the current layout of Central to convert 4 platforms to HSR, and allow dual gauge compatibility of UK and UIC gauge between Central and Polmadie? Keeps the regional services to one side and provides enhanced peak capacity for them, as well as allowing maximum flexibility by having dual compatibility (minus the platforms) between Central and Polmadie such that HSR lines needn't be kept seperate until crossing the Clyde into Central
The whole issue certainly is intriguing.
Edinburgh seems like it's a definite underground type solution, unless somebody is willing to get the cheque book out to drill two tunnels into the mound and under the castle, and rationalise the station layout. Glasgow seems a little less clear. St Enoch initially seeming sensible before considering the curves, and Central obviously being the prefferred option for connectivity - but with the added hastle of having to decide which adjacent street to bulldoze to make way for an extension.
I certainly can't imagine punters will be happy to see the four corners torn doon!
But then again, a new side extension to the west of Central for HSR would be a planning nightmare without a grade seperated crossover. Mind you, you could still build the west side extension to house a sizeable proportion of the regional services, and then rationalise the current layout of Central to convert 4 platforms to HSR, and allow dual gauge compatibility of UK and UIC gauge between Central and Polmadie? Keeps the regional services to one side and provides enhanced peak capacity for them, as well as allowing maximum flexibility by having dual compatibility (minus the platforms) between Central and Polmadie such that HSR lines needn't be kept seperate until crossing the Clyde into Central
The whole issue certainly is intriguing.
Last edited:
Scotrail314209
Established Member
No matter where they choose to build it, whether it be Central or a brand new station, people just simply won’t be happy with it.
If you were to build it in the Bridge Street area, it would require demolition of houses. However, I do think if they build it at Central they will find a way to interchange with the Subway too, maybe we’ll see Bridge Street or St Enoch subway closed.
The other issue is the bridges. The Clyde viaduct has two busy road bridges on each side, demolishing them wouldn’t go down well.
If you were to build it in the Bridge Street area, it would require demolition of houses. However, I do think if they build it at Central they will find a way to interchange with the Subway too, maybe we’ll see Bridge Street or St Enoch subway closed.
The other issue is the bridges. The Clyde viaduct has two busy road bridges on each side, demolishing them wouldn’t go down well.
- Status