High Speed 2

[j0hn0]

The reason why I said that there are a lot of delusional people is that they are wanting a railway to be built quicker than is practically possible.

Well there's a Hornby kit, build it if you're so impatient.....

then do please enlighten us on what is "practically possible"

I am assuming you are WELL informed to make such a statement, so do please enlighten us

 

[bengley]

Rather than new passenger lines, would perhaps a freight network be a better investment? Dedicated lines, designed to go further if it means a flatter route, all built to large loading guage, connecting the major freight locations? Running around twons, not through them. Approximate ideas for a network:

London ring- at about the M25.
Radial main lines from this-
Felixstowe and Harwich
Dover/Channel Tunnel
Southampton
West Country/Wales
Approx WCML (to Glasgow), MML and ECML (as far as Newcastle)

Also

Ipswich and Hull to Liverpool
Peterborough to Birmingham
Birmingham - South Wales


Don't take freight entirely off the main network, but take it off the busy and/or fast network. Create more intermodal and piggyback facilities to encorage haulage to take the train, using roads for local distribution.

That way, speed upgrades of the passenger mainlines could be meaningful.

This country is too small to have a dedicated freight network, people will always complain and say that it's not going to benefit anyone at all.

 

[Bill EWS]

Fair enough, Bluebottle. It's only a difference of opinion and not worth falling out over. No doubt much of this is just pre-election retoric and while an HS2 will probably come about it is most likely a long way off and we could have at least two changes of Government by the time a sod is turned, so the end result is anyone's guess.

In regard to a dedicated freight railway! While we have a privatised railway let these freight companies get together and pay for their own dedicated route(s) then they will learn the real cost of building and running a railway and not get it cheap off the backs of the taxpayer and passengers as they have at present. Or perhaps, just charge the costs to the voters who voted for a privatised railway in the first place. The shouldn't have it both ways. If it's private oit should stand on it's own feet or fall, just like any other private business. If they can't manage that then it should be re-nationalised. Again, just my opinion, of course.

 

[LE Greys]

Personally, I think that the best compromise for freight would be

Reopen the Varsity Line along its full length and rebuild the Witham-Bishop's Stortford branch with a new curve at Whitham. Passengers would go via Stansted, freight would be able to cut out the NLL and run direct from Felixstowe to Bletchley.
Quadruple the remaining bits of the ECML south of Grantham.
Quadruple the WCML (ideally with a line laid out to high speed alignments) between Norton Bridge and Kingmoor. This absorbs passenger traffic and makes it much simpler to extend HS2 to Carlisle and Glasgow.
Quadruple the GWML from Didcot to Wooton Basset
Quadruple the SWML from Worting Junction to St Mary's Junction in Southampton
Quadruple the GEML from Colchester to Shenfield with new 125 mph fasts
Quadruple West Anglia as far as Cambridge

The idea is to get passenger traffic out of the way at bottlenecks, and to provide a new Freightliner route from Felixstowe to the WCML which does not interfere too much with passenger traffic and links up with the MML and ECML, potentially even the GWML via Oxford.

 

[Nym]

The main problem with the HS2 published report atm IMO is the 2 track section from Birmingham to London, and the fact that there is no through route at birmingham, to allow Manchester/Liverpool/Leeds - Bristol etc. at high speed, possibly adding in a connection to the classic network at central birmingham to allow cross birmingham services to be routed through new street to bristol from London and the north seems to be a good idea IMO.

Looking at the West Midlands Approach map, a 2 face island platform wouldn't be too difficult to add onto Fazley Street Station. Widening the current approach viaduct over new bathalemew street doesn't seem to be too hard to do either, or simply have the trains (as they would need to be 'classic compatable') run into New Street and stop in there for lets say extending the Manchester - Birmingham services to Bristol as an express. It would also be possible to build the platforms to within the HS2 spec, further up the line in a gap bounded by the current line, and approximatly Miles Bruce Way, as a tempoary solution and kept at a later date for inclusion of services beyond birmingham. Later on, it would be possible to tunnel underneith birmingham City centre, approximatly allong the line of Birmingham New Street, to provide low level platforms for through running, eg, Bristol, Cardiff etc.

 

[CosherB]

In regard to a dedicated freight railway! While we have a privatised railway let these freight companies get together and pay for their own dedicated route(s) then they will learn the real cost of building and running a railway and not get it cheap off the backs of the taxpayer and passengers as they have at present. Or perhaps, just charge the costs to the voters who voted for a privatised railway in the first place. The shouldn't have it both ways. If it's private oit should stand on it's own feet or fall, just like any other private business. If they can't manage that then it should be re-nationalised. Again, just my opinion, of course.

That'd be fine if the HGV and bus industry had to build their own road infrastructure instead of sponging off the taxpayer and using all our roads and motorways, filling 2/3 of the available lanes with nose-to-tail trucks, and causing pretty much all the wear and tear to roads they don't even own!

 

[LE Greys]

The main problem with the HS2 published report atm IMO is the 2 track section from Birmingham to London, and the fact that there is no through route at birmingham, to allow Manchester/Liverpool/Leeds - Bristol etc. at high speed, possibly adding in a connection to the classic network at central birmingham to allow cross birmingham services to be routed through new street to bristol from London and the north seems to be a good idea IMO.

To reign back my famous 'rebuild the GCR' plan, it would not be too difficult to extend the current Chiltern route from Quainton Road alongside the new line to Brackley and then on to Banbury from either the north or south.

Even without HS2, the line through Sandwell & Dudley desperately needs quadrupling. Even better would be to reconnect Snow Hill with Wolverhampton. This would at least absorb traffic from Shrewsbury, but it should be possible to absorb other traffic from west and north. We would also be able to run services direct from Marylebone to Aberystwyth, and possibly Cross Country between Wolverhampton and Leamington Spa (although it's hard to imagine it avoiding New Street). The idea is to clear out New Street for use by HS2.

 

[Nym]

but what I'm proposing there would be two HS2 stations in Brum, one for terminating services and using a couple of platforms at new street for through running, wouldn't need that much new track, or potentially slew the lines and put the platforms at the new HS2 station and use the through lines at new street to gain access to bristol??

 

[LE Greys]

but what I'm proposing there would be two HS2 stations in Brum, one for terminating services and using a couple of platforms at new street for through running, wouldn't need that much new track, or potentially slew the lines and put the platforms at the new HS2 station and use the through lines at new street to gain access to bristol??

Do you mean Bristol from the north?

To me, the real problem at Birmingham is lack of capacity between Wolverhampton and Coventry. HS2 will absorb a lot of the express traffic to London, and so clear out the Coventry-New Street section. I would either quadruple the other half or divert some traffic into Snow Hill via the old GWR line. There are a lot of crossing moves at the west end of New Street. Grand Junction and Proof House can cope with most at the east end, but Five Ways is a flat junction. Seperating out the expresses might help avoid crossing moves, even without flyovers.

 

[ChrisCooper]

An "easy" quadrupling would be the MML, which is built as a 4 track railway for it's entire length (counting alternative routes), but currently has a lot of 3 or 2 track bottlenecks between Sharnbrook and Glendon Junction. I hope at very least when Leicester is resignalled provision is made for 4 tracking, if it's not done. Wigston to Syston should be 4 tracked too, as part of upgrading the Birmingham to Ipswich route to take more freight traffic.

 

[Aictos]

I agree with reopening the Vasity line - East West Link anyone?

As to the ECML, it really ought to be 4 tracks the whole length say Welwyn Garden City to Knebworth, Huntingdon to Peterborough, Peterborough to Doncaster via Grantham, Doncaster to Newcastle via York and finally Newcastle to Edinburgh.

Would be a lot of money but a far better idea then HS2 which in turn would deliver a hell of a increase to capacity on the route.

 

[Nym]

would make a hell of a lot more capacity, but it wouldn't make much more money, there just isn't the demand for traffic on upgrades of classic lines, unless it's a full major upgrage, WCML for example. Also take into account the length of time you'll be blockading sections of the ECML for upgrades, it is wholy agreed that the lesser total cost solution is a complete paralell route, and this might aswell be a high speed one as most of the associated costs with building a line relate to things that cannot be chaged between a 125mph line and a 400km/h line, mainly land take, perminant way works etc. so the cost to benifit ratio for a brand new 125mph line that will not in it'self generate a signigicant amount more traffic is nothing compared to the amount that will be generated by a 400km/h line.

Especially is HS2 is done properly, and provision is made for 4 track for more of the route into London, the potential for high speed freight could be realised, not nesseserally on HS2 itself, but on the WCML. Also, the idea of motorail services needs to be looked into again, I'd be intrested to know their plans for the Manchester/Liverpool/Preston approach, as a 'Manchester South Parkway' would do well, but as would a 'Manchester North Parkway' and have Manchester served by another branch, also, if international services where to be created, 'airside' platforms aren't too dificult to implement, even if they have the new station in the piccadilly campus, say Mayfeild, or see sense and have it in the Manchester Central or Exchange campus, there is potential for two stations, one international and one domestic as space on the ground in central manchester near other transport links is currently at a premium, there isn't much potential for tunnelling either due to things under manchester that are already undergound, IMO, they'd be best using either a viaduct and/or parallell route to the Styal Branch with Manchester South Parkway in or near the Manchester Airport campus, or, with MSP in the same area, follow the line from Northwitch and Sale into Manchester Central/Exchange with some wider and new viaducts in the city, possibly diverting metrolink to street running in some areas of Chester Road to create the space, or pushing the met onto a new viaduct, but then again, this is the crazy one that would change the majority of met routes back to heavy rail and re-open Central as a commuter station...

 

[LE Greys]

I like Nym's Motorail idea, especially if it might be possible to connect directly through to Paris, Lille or even Nice. It would have to be priced competitively (compared to a hire car and flight) but it's probably possible to generate at least some kind of market. Currently, the Chunnel is fairly convenient for Southerners going to northern France, but not the south and not for the rest of England, let alone Scotland or Wales.

Looking at quadrupling, the GWML is probably the easiest, since the line is paired by direction. For 90% of the route, you would effectively be building new fast lines south of the old line with no effect on traffic whatsoever (similar to most of the Trent Valley work). The big blockades would be at Didcot, Swindon and Wooten Basset, although I think it's just about possible to do two of them in Christmas possessions. Swindon is the tricky one, because you would need an extra platform to the south, possibly a flyover at the eastern end for Cheltenham trains and perhaps a junction realignment. Rugby all over again, but at least it's only one station.

However, lines paired by direction, such as the ECML, involve work that straddles an active main line. Even if you do build alongside, you would still have to reverse all the signalling on one of the old lines. That's probably why it hasn't happened already.

 

[jopsuk]

For motorail, do we have stock capable of carrying cars on two levels that fits our loading gauge? the single decker motorail vans of the past severely limit capacity. As far as I'm aware, there are some motorail services in France and elsewhere that runs as seperate trains- you hand your car over to the loaders at one end and collect it at the other. Far higher capacity than hooking two or three wagons that each take two or three cars to the back of a fairly short sleeper train (cf the final days of motorail on the Nigh Riveria).

 

[Nym]

No, it would be a near carbon copy of what is being done at the minute in the channel tunnel, or close to it, a roll on roll off system running at reasonably high frequency between 'Manchester South Parkway' and London (somwhere, proberbly watford), Ashford etc etc

 

[jopsuk]

I agree with reopening the Vasity line - East West Link anyone?

As to the ECML, it really ought to be 4 tracks the whole length say Welwyn Garden City to Knebworth, Huntingdon to Peterborough, Peterborough to Doncaster via Grantham, Doncaster to Newcastle via York and finally Newcastle to Edinburgh.

Would be a lot of money but a far better idea then HS2 which in turn would deliver a hell of a increase to capacity on the route.

I don't think there's need for fully four-track from Edinburgh to Newcastle, though I agree on South of Newcastle. North of there, I'd suggest long loops at stations- including possible new stations between Berwick and Dunbar- and a second platform at Dunbar, plus maybe four tracks from Drem to Waverly, with new Edinburgh-Newcastle local services to take advantage- freight and local trains being overtaken by using station loops.

 

[thegrich37423]

Nobody has yet told me why they think that its possible to build a railway line faster? I'm PMSL laughing here! Please don't stop.

What makes me laugh even more is this Motorail idea, but I'm all for a group of desperate, deluded people using clapped-out 1980s stock for a fantastic, premiere service to France!!

 

[The Planner]

Nobody has yet told me why they think that its possible to build a railway line faster? I'm PMSL laughing here! Please don't stop.

Faster than what though ?? a motorway ?? name me one motorway that has gone from planning stage, through public consultation and construction in less than 7 or 8 years ?? The M25 took 20 years to finish.

 

[Geezertronic]

Faster than what though ?? a motorway ?? name me one motorway that has gone from planning stage, through public consultation and construction in less than 7 or 8 years ?? The M25 took 20 years to finish.

The M6 Toll took about the same if not longer and that is only 30ish miles long

 

[Nym]

M6 Toll took 35 years from first planning to opening, and the idea of motorail would be the same as oh, I dunno, eurotunnel, they seem to be doing reasonably well with the shuttle services...

Do think before you start laughing at ideas...

 

[LE Greys]

Nobody has yet told me why they think that its possible to build a railway line faster? I'm PMSL laughing here! Please don't stop.

What makes me laugh even more is this Motorail idea, but I'm all for a group of desperate, deluded people using clapped-out 1980s stock for a fantastic, premiere service to France!!

I've given it a bit of thought recently, and have a rough idea of how it might work, but we probably need a new thread.

In a few years' time, all Sleeper stock will be thoroughly past it. If we are not to loose our sleepers, then replacements will be needed. Not sure if they will be to Nightstar standard or something else, but replacements will be needed. At the same time, look for some form of car carrier to attach to the back of the sleepers. It can't be double-deck, otherwise people carriers and high trailers would not fit on board, but could be a covered version of the car flats used to move Transit vans out of Southampton.

The Aberdeen sleeper would connect with the Orkney/Shetland ferry if it was retimed or had a second sailing added, so you hand your car over in Lerwick and collect it in London. The extra vehicles would probably mean that you could no longer combine Aberdeen, Inverness and Fort William at Edinburgh, so run the Aberdeen portion as a separate train down the East Coast. Possibly consider and Oban portion to connect with the Western Isles ferries.

Meanwhile, look at the possibility of extending the Edinburgh/Glasgow portions from London to Paris (the first day services from both would arrive at around 09:00 if they use HS2). Again use new stock and run both separately with Motorail vans attached. Cardiff and Penzance are other destinations worth considering, while from Manchester and Leeds you could use double-deckers and run via HS2 itself, with a bit of work to some connecting lines. Remember that two Continental-LG coaches could probably pass each other on most lines, but would clip platforms and structures. The first day train from Birmingham would reach Paris at around 09:00, but a service to Nice might be worth considering.

This is all subject to cost, because it has to be cheaper than two low-cost air tickets and a hire car. It's more convenient, no luggage restrictions and you don't have to lug heavy cases around, but money talks. Whoever runs this would need to consider that.

We really need a new thread for this, so feel free to move this somewhere else.

Edit: These new sleepers would be worth considering as a way of reviving fast mail and parcels traffic as well. I reckon if we had had MkIII parcels vans, we would not have lost so much traffic. 125 mph behind Class 67s, that'd put road haulage to shame. Even air would have a struggle keeping up. Still, the French TGV la Poste can show us how it's done.

 

[bluebottle]

I've given it a bit of thought recently, and have a rough idea of how it might work, but we probably need a new thread.

In a few years' time, all Sleeper stock will be thoroughly past it. If we are not to loose our sleepers, then replacements will be needed. Not sure if they will be to Nightstar standard or something else, but replacements will be needed. At the same time, look for some form of car carrier to attach to the back of the sleepers. It can't be double-deck, otherwise people carriers and high trailers would not fit on board, but could be a covered version of the car flats used to move Transit vans out of Southampton.

The Aberdeen sleeper would connect with the Orkney/Shetland ferry if it was retimed or had a second sailing added, so you hand your car over in Lerwick and collect it in London. The extra vehicles would probably mean that you could no longer combine Aberdeen, Inverness and Fort William at Edinburgh, so run the Aberdeen portion as a separate train down the East Coast. Possibly consider and Oban portion to connect with the Western Isles ferries.

Meanwhile, look at the possibility of extending the Edinburgh/Glasgow portions from London to Paris (the first day services from both would arrive at around 09:00 if they use HS2). Again use new stock and run both separately with Motorail vans attached. Cardiff and Penzance are other destinations worth considering, while from Manchester and Leeds you could use double-deckers and run via HS2 itself, with a bit of work to some connecting lines. Remember that two Continental-LG coaches could probably pass each other on most lines, but would clip platforms and structures. The first day train from Birmingham would reach Paris at around 09:00, but a service to Nice might be worth considering.

This is all subject to cost, because it has to be cheaper than two low-cost air tickets and a hire car. It's more convenient, no luggage restrictions and you don't have to lug heavy cases around, but money talks. Whoever runs this would need to consider that.

We really need a new thread for this, so feel free to move this somewhere else.

Edit: These new sleepers would be worth considering as a way of reviving fast mail and parcels traffic as well. I reckon if we had had MkIII parcels vans, we would not have lost so much traffic. 125 mph behind Class 67s, that'd put road haulage to shame. Even air would have a struggle keeping up. Still, the French TGV la Poste can show us how it's done.

I imagine that's the reason it won't happen.

 

[thegrich37423]

I am laughing at the petition's crazy idea that it seems to think that HS2 can be built quicker. It hasn't even had its public consultation nor a confirmed route that its going to run from/to.

Until justification is given as to why HS2 should be built in the quickest time possible, with no thoroughness or thought gone into the planning process, then I have every right to sit here and laugh at the absurdity of it all. It's all complete dreamland. HS2 is going to take years to build, and that's an unshakable fact.

 

[TGV]

Of course it's going to take years - talk about stating the obvious. Personally I'm conerned that it'll be built at all. That's my own personal point.

 

[Nym]

if they wanna get past the NIMBYs the're gonna need a station in the chilterns, could be the beginings of HS3 to bristol..?

EDIT, would be a branch off of the mainline with 3/4tph stopping there (and terminating?) or using the hybrid running ones with onward running over the GWML to Bristol/Swansea?

Since the line can supposedly handle 16tph, thats looking at 3tph from Brum, Manc, Leeds, Bristol and 4 from the above each to the continent potentially

 

[j0hn0]

I am laughing at the petition's crazy idea that it seems to think that HS2 can be built quicker. It hasn't even had its public consultation nor a confirmed route that its going to run from/to.

Until justification is given as to why HS2 should be built in the quickest time possible, with no thoroughness or thought gone into the planning process, then I have every right to sit here and laugh at the absurdity of it all. It's all complete dreamland. HS2 is going to take years to build, and that's an unshakable fact.

Well there is no way that you can prove otherwise, dick

In order to "Estimate", you take examples of how things have gone before and work it out accordingly. ie WCML upgrade vs HS1

Please remind me which was completed on time and on budget and which one was way over budget, descoped due to cost overruns and basically just improved two bottlenecks?

In other news, Channel tunnel plans have been shelved because "we've never done it before" :roll:

Do you have any idea about planning?

 

[Waverley125]

to me it's fairly Damn obvious what the best solution is.

For high Speed

4 tracks (2 fast, 2 slow), on London-Birmingham-Manchester-Preston-Carlisle-Glasgow. Junctions at Birmingham, Manchester, Preston & Carlisle for running onto classic lines

Secondary lines Carlisle-Edinburgh and Manchester-Liverpool, possibly followed by Carlisle-Belfast and Liverpool-Holyhead-Dublin.

Avoiding lines for both Birmingham and Manchester, so a London-Glasgow non-stop service can be run.

Slow lines allow diversion into non-HS destinations e.g. Coventry, Wolverhampton, as well as for HS freight and post.

4 tracks London-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds, 2 tracks Leeds-Newcastle-Edinburgh

Nottingham to have an Avoiding line through the erewash valley, with slow lines giving services to Derby, Leicester, Matlock etc.

4 Tracks London-Reading-Bristol-Cardiff-Swansea

slow loops into Swindon & Bath, as well as junctions to classics for trains to Gloucester, Cheltenham, Oxford etc.


For classic:

4 Tracks on the ECML London-Newcastle
speed upgrades Doncaster-Leeds & TP network to 125mph
4 Tracks London-Sheffield & speed to 125 with Pendolinos
Wiring almost everywhere
S&C speed upgrade to 100mph.

 

[Geezertronic]

I notice you always post stuff like this without mentioning how it would be funded. Your opinion on that would also be appreciated since your ideas for the Classics especially will cost a few quid. Seems more like a wish list than a proper suggestion list?

 

[tbtc]

S&C speed upgrade to 100mph

Got to love your optimism

 

[j0hn0]

I notice you always post stuff like this without mentioning how it would be funded. Your opinion on that would also be appreciated since your ideas for the Classics especially will cost a few quid. Seems more like a wish list than a proper suggestion list?

well, normally they just borrow the money for projects like this