High Speed 2 - do we really need it?

[Philip Elliott]

Do you have a source for that? Be interesting to have a look at that

It's on the HS2 website / document.

And your point is?

The main destination from Halesowen & Rugeley is Birmingham but at the moment the uncompetitive times by public transport mean people drive.

Again, missing the point. If a 2 track HS2 line stopped everywhere, it would defeat the object. If HS2 was 4 track, the case for intermediate stations along the route increases dramatically.

It shouldn't be a 2-track railway, that is the point. Making the route 'high speed' reduces the ability for it to actually be useful.

Current plans show Birmingham City Centre station as a Terminus so it would be foolish to stop here and reverse as the journey time would increase. Birmingham Interchange (by the airport) is on the main route.

Leeds services simply should never go near the West Midlands. However there are currently no plans for any trains to stop at Birmingham Interchange other than the Birmingham services (so people from Manchester wishing to use the airport will still have to use a Voyager via Wolves)

Ignoring your exaggeration, I believe HS2 should be 4 track at least until the planned Y split

The cost of providing 250mph makes it unaffordable for 4 track. The route WILL be 2-track and hence stupid.

A 390 running at 140mph over HS2 (even to Birmingham) would do the journey in less time than on the current WCML

A 140 mph train will not be able to travel over the 250mph HS2 - my whole point is that should be a 140/155mph 'classic' railway....and 4 track

Its also worth remembering that with the WCML full from 2020 its hard not to see some stops being ommitted before HS2 opens anyway in order to cope with long-distance demand.

People love to quote this 2020 (or 2016) figure but is there any evidence that is will be 'full' by that date? According to NR, the MML is already 'full' but I don't the money rushing to put back in all the missing track:roll:

 

[YesToHS2]

"A 390 running at 140mph will be able to get to Glasgow quicker than a HS service."

This will be unnecessary under the current plans, a brand new fleet of 45 classic compatible units will run at 125mph on the WCML and then 225mph when they reache the HS2 spur. This is what a lot of people, mainly critics can't get their heads around.

"How anyone think running a London - Leeds line via Birmingham (but not stopping) is a good idea?"

Although not in the current time table there is the ability for trains from the north to either terminate at Birmingham Curzon Street or stop at the new Birmingham interchange which will have connections to various destinations across the west Midlands. So you see HS2 has much more scope for development than critics would have people believe.

I was accused of making things up with my over active imagination, I did point out the relative documentation to back up the articles though. I would say though that the critics don't have the imagination to see past their prejudice and some people have been do mislead by protesters that they don't know what to think any more.

"Trying to run all north-south IC services on one 2-track railway is a recipe for disaster....."we are sorry to announce the north is closed due to a cow on the line"

How have Germany and France operated them for so long then on two track systems?Germany has had one single major ICE crash and rail operators learned from their mistakes. This argument seems like a last ditch attempt to make HS2 sound scary to the general public. In fact because of the lessons learned by the ice crash high speed tracks are now designed from the outset with safety in mind to reduce damage and casualties by removing track side obstacles that a train could collide with.


I would ask all supporters to become more vocal, download the new poster and comment on every article you find. The critics must be stopped from misleading the public. If they want to protest on a local level that is understandable but they should expect to get the public on side by misleading them.

 

[Greenback]

The point about four tracking is not so much about crashes and collisions, but rather about engineering work, the ability to build intermediate stations (not necessarily now but later without huge cost and disruption), even more capacity and flexibility.

Even those in favour of HS2 must see the sense in building a better equipped line?

 

[YesToHS2]

The point about four tracking is not so much about crashes and collisions, but rather about engineering work, the ability to build intermediate stations (not necessarily now but later without huge cost and disruption), even more capacity and flexibility.

Even those in favour of HS2 must see the sense in building a better equipped line?

Surely Germany and France have systems in place for engineering works? Most of their networks are only two tracks.

I read something interesting about the yellow fronts on trains, it's probably widely known that it's so engineers can see the trains but the new ICE services on HS2 won't have to have yellow fronts as engineering on HS1 when trains are running is banned.

[Edit] there has actually been some suggestion by protesters that HSR is some how unsafe.

 

[Greenback]

That may be true, but I haven't seen it suggested on here!

AIUI, in France and Germany more use is made of the abundant crossovers that allow single line working, rather than the complete closure that is the British way. Here, I fear that HS2 will be closing at 2000 on Saturdays and not reopening until 1600 on Sundays in order to allow NR or it's successors to undertake essential maintneance! Particularly since you point out that engineering work will be banned whne trains are running.

 

[YesToHS2]

That may be true, but I haven't seen it suggested on here!

AIUI, in France and Germany more use is made of the abundant crossovers that allow single line working, rather than the complete closure that is the British way. Here, I fear that HS2 will be closing at 2000 on Saturdays and not reopening until 1600 on Sundays in order to allow NR or it's successors to undertake essential maintneance! Particularly since you point out that engineering work will be banned whne trains are running.

I would hope that the government will look to European systems for ideas. I wasn't suggesting HS2 engineering will be banned I just thought it was interesting about HS1. Single track running seems feasible and sensible to me. Rail operators are saying that Weekends are becoming as busy as weekdays so weekend complete closures would be madness.

 

[Geezertronic]

It's on the HS2 website / document.

Do you have a link by any chance?

 

[Greenback]

Ah, sorry YestoHS2, I misread what you said! Yes, for a prestigious 21st century line it would be madness!

 

[pablo]

The benefit of HS1? Well, it takes me off the Victoria line in the morning peak although I have to tramp from Eus to St P instead. The service to Faversham is snail pace after Ebbs so it's not particularly fast overall. Time-wise, it's even for me. You've got to remember that the N Kent services were a fudge set up by JP to get L&CR off the hook when their numbers didn't add up and Government had to subsidise. So you can't expect it to address a real domestic demand although it does by-pass a particularly slow stretch of line. It's very comfortable though! What is disappointing is that it's something of a dead-end at the St P end and will cost a fortune to connect into a national network which would enhance its utility no end. Perhaps the Fav service would be more useful integrated into Crossrail by a flyover in the region of Rainham/Dag and the spare capacity at St P used otherwise.
Another missed opportunity caused by our penchant for short-term thinking.
Some posts are hard to read. It would help to read over them before posting.

 

[Philip Elliott]

Do you have a link by any chance?

http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedrail/hs2ltd/technicalappendix/pdf/report.pdf

Page 35 onwards.

This will be unnecessary under the current plans, a brand new fleet of 45 classic compatible units will run at 125mph on the WCML and then 225mph when they reache the HS2 spur. This is what a lot of people, mainly critics can't get their heads around.

You didn't read what I said. Classic compatible trains can only travel at 125mph if a MASSIVE upgrade of the WCML takes place taking upto 3 years and maybe £2-4 billion. The 390s will still be able to travel faster - at 140mph.

How have Germany and France operated them for so long then on two track systems?

Intercity services to the SW of France don't go on the LGV Sud-East (SE). There also only a handful of services an hour.

Although not in the current time table there is the ability for trains from the north to either terminate at Birmingham Curzon Street or stop at the new Birmingham interchange which will have connections to various destinations across the west Midlands. So you see HS2 has much more scope for development than critics would have people believe.

It is still ludricrous for trains to travel from London - Leeds via Birmingham. How many people drive from London to Leeds via the M40 & A38?


I would like to point out I work Virgin Trains in the train planning department so the West Coast is quite familiar to me......

 

[tbtc]

It is still ludricrous for trains to travel from London - Leeds via Birmingham. How many people drive from London to Leeds via the M40 & A38?

There are lots of examples of that in the UK though if you want to play that game. Is it ludicrous for people in Sheffield to go to Reading via Birmingham? Is it ludicrous for people in Scunthorpe to to to Lincoln via Sheffield? Is it ludicrous for people in Doncaster to go to Bradford via Pontefract and Brighouse? Is it... (etc etc)

All people care about is the time taken for their direct journey, not where the train passes on the way

 

[sprinterguy]

It is still ludricrous for trains...rvices pass through non stop, not vice versa.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Some of the High Speed lines in Germany can be closed and traffic rerouted for engineering or broken down train purposes, e.g. Stuttgart-Mannheim I've done via the classic line due to a blockage. Frankfurt Airport to Cologne is not avoidable but I expect most others are, eg. Nuremberg-Ingolstadt can ba avoided by using the augsburg line.

Also, I thought HS2 was going to be the world's first 4 track high speed line, at least as far as Brum?

 

[sprinterguy]

Also, I thought HS2 was going to be the world's first 4 track high speed line, at least as far as Brum?

Not from the look of the published profile plans on the DfT website: Twin track all the way. Another daft element of the scheme: You'd think that four tracking to Birmingham would have been taken up without question, given that it is going to have to carry the densest traffic levels.

I support HS2 but I sincerely hope that some more sensible decisions than are apparent at the moment are taken.

 

[MacCookie]

You didn't read what I said. Classic compatible trains can only travel at 125mph if a MASSIVE upgrade of the WCML takes place taking upto 3 years and maybe £2-4 billion. The 390s will still be able to travel faster - at 140mph.

I would have thought that the "Classic compatible" trains would be able to travel at 125mph on the WCML if they have tilt. If not, they'll presumably limited to the non-EPS speeds.

As for 390s, they can't actually do more than 125mph just now. Going at 140mph will require in-cab signalling and we all know what happened when Railtrack tried to implement that...

Ewan

 

[Geezertronic]

It is still ludricrous for trains to travel from London - Leeds via Birmingham. How many people drive from London to Leeds via the M40 & A38?

It's not ludicrous if it is the quicker route (not necessarily the shortest in terms of mileage).

My example (albeit driving) is from London Docklands to Heathrow (which I unfortunately have to do on occasion). The shortest route is 22 miles (ish) with a reported time of 56mins but as it is driving through London, it is actually quicker to go via the M11/M25 during the day which is 63 miles and around 1hr 15 mins.

 

[Sapphire Blue]

It's not ludicrous if it is the quicker route (not necessarily the shortest in terms of mileage).

My example (albeit driving) is from London Docklands to Heathrow (which I unfortunately have to do on occasion). The shortest route is 22 miles (ish) with a reported time of 56mins but as it is driving through London, it is actually quicker to go via the M11/M25 during the day which is 63 miles and around 1hr 15 mins.

And it WAS quicker during the 40 odd months that they took to widen the M1 up to Luton. Drove up that way several times (also cutting back near Silverstone on occasions was quicker too).

 

[YesToHS2]

I would have thought that the "Classic compatible" trains would be able to travel at 125mph on the WCML if they have tilt. If not, they'll presumably limited to the non-EPS speeds.

As for 390s, they can't actually do more than 125mph just now. Going at 140mph will require in-cab signalling and we all know what happened when Railtrack tried to implement that...

Ewan

The new series ICE T trains tilt so we already have a current model to base any new CC hybrid trains. The procurement process isn't going to start until many years so speculation on the specification of the train is irrelevant. What is relevant the time table set out by HS2. Who says the new trains wont tilt and therefore be able to travel at 125mph?

The 390s will be able to travel at 140mph on the WCML only after some re signalling work and only for very short sections. HS2 hybrid trains will be able to run the whole length of the new line at 225mph.

 

[gordonthemoron]

ICE T trains (T stands for multiple unit) only do 230km/h though and are electric only and use the same tilting mechanism as Pendolino. ICE TD are diesel and only do 200km/h, they also tilt but use a mechanism developed by Siemens

 

[YesToHS2]

ICE T trains (T stands for multiple unit) only do 230km/h though and are electric only and use the same tilting mechanism as Pendolino. ICE TD are diesel and only do 200km/h, they also tilt but use a mechanism developed by Siemens

I knew the T didn't stand for tilting, I just happened to watch a program about them the other day which said they tilt. My point was that companies are developing trains all the time so in 5 or 10 years time it's easy to see that there could be tilting trains that are capable of 225mph when on high speed lines and 125mph on conventional lines.

If trains didn't tilt would much time be lost over all, as the trains would be able to travel at very high speed for more than a third of the journey. Assuming that trains travelling on the WCML slowed down for curves and travelled as fast as the line will allow on straight sections

 

[gordonthemoron]

DB only use the tilting trains on very windy routes. ICE1, 2 & 3 trains all run on classic lines despite not having tilt

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I'll just add my final overall view on the new HS2 line now:
Personally, I don't think this needs to be a HS line: the current route passes through so many potential areas for stations (West London, Bracknell/Berkshire, the Chilterns), we should just have a thrid mainline between London and Birmingham (with new stations in each), serving about 3-4 places on route, at good old 125mph running. The old WCML should be kept for a reduced service to Birmingham Nee St 9maybe only two an hour, with one still serving Wolves), but better ones to Manchester/Liverpool (whilst still retaining 2/3 tph for Birmingham Intl and Coventry). How would Leeds fit around this, tbh I don't know. Does HS2 really neeed to go to Leeds?

My other fear is that the new HS2 will result in a rubbish service for Leeds on the ECML and any long-distance trains out of Euston on the WCML. If the theory mentioned before is correct (i.e. only 1tph via Birmingham to Liverpool, calling at all stations) is implemented then this is an absolute disgrace. HS2 and services affected by it should not twist people's arms in order to make them take the High Speed line or go on a dumbed-down traditional service (like SE services in Kent). 3tph for Manchester, Crewe, Stoke, Coventry, MKC etc must be maintained,alongside the fast trains for Liverpool,Lancashire and Glasgow.

In summary, I don't feel HS2 should be a High Speed line: it should be there to complement services on the WCML and CML. Pasengers must not have their arms twisted into taking HS2 to get to anywhere in the North fast: we must maintain the other mainlines (and their services) to the standard as available at the moment.

Any feedback (esp from YesToHS2 etc) would be appreicated and responded to.

Thanks

 

[Geezertronic]

The only problem with that is it doesn't help decrease North/South journey times especially to Scotland if the line is not HS. The government will have to rename it SF3 (Semi-Fast) after the WCML & ECML

 

[YesToHS2]

The only problem with that is it doesn't help decrease North/South journey times especially to Scotland if the line is not HS. The government will have to rename it SF3 (Semi-Fast) after the WCML & ECML

The fundamental point he missed is, whilst capacity is the reasoning for the need, the high speed element is essential for HS2 to work and pay for itself. A low speed line may cost about £2bn less than a high speed line but there will be no time benefits, no modal shift therefore no economic benefits to the wider economy.

Critics bang on about cost and speed but don't realise that a conventional speed line will cost just as much, £2bn compared with the total cost of HS2 isn't very much at all. Either HS2 is quick and pays for it'self by improving connectivity to northern cities or we pay for and subsidies a conventional line that won't actually pay for itself and will be under used as business people continue to fly or just not trade between cities at all.

 

[imagination]

Matt - either you are confused about where Bracknell is, or you are confused about where HS2 is going to go, or you are crazy enough to think that people would travel that far from Bracknell on extremely busy roads to get to a station that ISN'T a high speed line. And in that case, why mention Bracknell? Slough is considerably closer to the route, Ealing far closer still. And the proposed route doesnt go into Berkshire at all.

Old Oak Common is probably the best place on the line to serve Berks and that's getting a station anyway.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Matt - either you are confused about where Bracknell is, or you are confused about where HS2 is going to go, or you are crazy enough to think that people would travel that far from Bracknell on extremely busy roads to get to a station that ISN'T a high speed line. And in that case, why mention Bracknell? Slough is considerably closer to the route, Ealing far closer still. And the proposed route doesnt go into Berkshire at all.

Old Oak Common is probably the best place on the line to serve Berks and that's getting a station anyway.

Sorry - I had the word Bracknell at the time I posted, I ofcourse meant to say Slough, or maybe in a more exclusive location to servive the NW Home Counties!!

 

[MCR247]

Why are people suggesting that we make HS2 4 track? Why? If its only a HS line, then why will there be two 250mph trains running parallel?

 

[gordonthemoron]

because Labour suggested it

 

[Geezertronic]

Why are people suggesting that we make HS2 4 track? Why? If its only a HS line, then why will there be two 250mph trains running parallel?

If future plans include serving intermediate places between London and Birmingham for example, 4 tracking would make sense so HS trains do not get stuck behind semi fast trains. Whilst it might not be needed immediately, it would make sense to build it 4 track immediately at least until the proposed Y split to avoid future disruption.

 

[tbtc]

Presumably the cost of a four-track line is only going to be marginally higher than a two-track line?