High Speed Rail for Scotland?

[mackay_hannah]

High Speed Rail – the Scottish opportunity
Monday 8 June 2009, The Apex International Hotel, Edinburgh

Keynote address by Stewart Stevenson MSP, Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change

Featured speakers include:
Councillor Alistair Watson, Chair, Strathclyde Partnership for Transport
Jim Steer / Julie Mills, Director, Greengauge 21
Dr Alan James, Chief Executive, UK Ultraspeed
Chaired by Graham Bell, Convenor, High Speed 2 Scotland

Planning by the UK government for a high speed, north-south, rail line in Britain is underway with the creation of a company - High Speed 2 - to review the case for services between London and Scotland. It is due to report back to government with its findings by the end of the year.

In the past year groups such as Atkins, Arup, Greengauge 21, the 2M Group and the Conservative Party have proposed the development of high speed rail networks with variations in cost, route and technology. In an effort to ensure Scotland is not excluded from discussions, the Scottish Parliament’s Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change Committee began an Inquiry into the potential benefits of high-speed rail services earlier last year and received a significant number of submissions from across the business, environment and transport communities.

Hearing from the Scottish Government Minister, Network Rail, rail operators, business representatives and key stakeholders in the development of high speed rail, delegates attending this conference will be encouraged to:
· explore the potential economic and environmental opportunities to be gained by linking Scotland to any proposed high speed rail network
· assess the challenges to the development of a high speed system – interoperability with the existing network, accessibility of routes, associated costs
· examine the various options for high speed links – the potential routes and the technologies to be used
· discuss whether the potential investment on high speed rail links is the best use of transport funding
· look at how any proposed network is likely to funded and;
· consider whether a high speed rail network will facilitate a modal shift in commuter and freight behaviour or simply cater for increased overall demand.


TO BOOK YOUR PLACE NOW or to find out more
http://www.mackayhannah.com/upcoming-conferences/high-speed-rail---the-scottish-opportunity
Or Call Jane on 0131 556 1500

 

[bengley]

A high speed link is badly needed between the south of England and Scotland - it takes forever to get there otherwise!

 

[me123]

Scotland-England High Speed Line is an essential future development. I hope that, in construction of HS2, they will see sense and identify routes for Northward expansion. It's imperative that this happens, and can only be good for every single city along the way.

 

[Metroland]

Nearly two-thirds of people in the UK believe that high-speed rail connections could completely replace short-haul domestic flights in the future, a new report has claimed.

Research for the Institution of Civil Engineers (Ice) indicated that there is widespread public support for faster trains, with 71 per cent of those polled by ComRes predicting that they would boost economic growth and 73 per cent that they would reduce congestion on roads.

Of the more than 1,000 people quizzed, 63 per cent of respondents believed that there would be no need for flights within the UK if the high-speed rail network was expanded.

Tom Foulkes, Ice director general, commented: "Providing faster, affordable rail services between major cities could reduce demand for short haul air travel and possibly put an end to it completely."

He added that airport runways in Britain are "already congested" and air travel is one of the largest contributors to carbon emissions.

http://live.cilt.netxtra.net/rss

 

[Geezertronic]

A high speed link is badly needed between the south of England and Scotland - it takes forever to get there otherwise!

I hardly think 4 1/2 hours from London to Scotland is forever? However I agree that High Speed rail would improve matters more than any further improvements on either the WCML and ECML could do for this market

 

[gordonthemoron]

I hardly think 4 1/2 hours from London to Scotland is forever? However I agree that High Speed rail would improve matters more than any further improvements on either the WCML and ECML could do for this market

It takes me 5.5 hours to get to Hamburg & two of the stretches are on high speed track

 

[me123]

That's only 87mph average (Germany) compared to 89.5mph average over here (based on the above figures and distances from Google Maps).

And people say that we're behind the Germans :roll:

 

[gordonthemoron]

That's only 87mph average (Germany) compared to 89.5mph average over here (based on the above figures and distances from Google Maps).

And people say that we're behind the Germans :roll:

is that as the crow flies or following the route?

 

[Waverley125]

the problem is, with talk of 'HS2' we're going to create the idea that one line will solve all problems, and end up allowing the tories to do what they plan, serving everywhere with one line that ends up being no faster than present.

To me, it's obvious we need firstly a two-tier system of Long & medium distance high speed, and two lines going northwards, one via Birmingham, Manchester, Preston and Carlisle to Glasgow, the other via Sheffield, Leeds & Newcastle to Edinburgh.

The second-tier HS could then provide services branching off the HS line to places like Leicester, Derby, Nottingham, Coventry, Wolverhampton etc. The key idea is that it is the 'first tier' lines which would be designed to eventually see international trains, while the 'second tier' would not.

This allows the necessary customs facilities to be limited only to where they will be needed, and also means that everyone does not have to change in London to go to the Continent (although any trains from say, Manchester to Amsterdam, would probably also call at Stratford).

We also need to ensure that further expansion of the system to the South West & Northern Scotland (Edinburgh-Dundee-Aberdeen, Glasgow-Stirling-Dundee and Edinburgh-Glasgow), as well as cross-country routes (Liverpool-Manchester-Leeds, Bristol-Birmingham-Sheffield, Sheffield-Manchester) are brought to fruition.

Finally, I'd hope we can start to move away from just having the channel tunnel, and look to further international connections e.g. Liverpool-Dublin, Carlisle-Belfast, Colchester-The Hague etc.

Ambitious, but worth it, in my view. Once these sorts of connections are available, HS should not only destroy domestic flights, but really eat in to the cross-european market. Who's fly to Schiphol when you can go from St Pancras to Amsterdam Centraal in just over 2 hours?

 

[Metroland]

BRITAIN’S next high-speed line—HS2 from London to the West Midlands and beyond—could be running within 15 years at a top speed of 250 mph, twice the maximum speed now allowed on conventional tracks.

Details of the future specification were given to the Derby and Derbyshire Rail Forum by Professor Andrew McNaughton, chief engineer of the High Speed 2 company, set up by the Government to develop plans for the new line.

With such a high top speed, he said, there could be no tunnels and few curves. Aerodynamic forces would increase tunnel costs tenfold, and while the minimum radius for curves on the 125mph East Coast Main Line was 1,800 metres, at 250 mph the minimum radius on a new route would have to be 7,200 metres.

But double-deck high speed trains with 12,000 installed horse power would be able to climb much steeper gradients than ‘classic’ trains—3.5 per cent, compared with only 0.5 per cent grades on conventional lines. He explained: “High speed rail is not invisible. You cannot hide it.”

Although Prof McNaughton did not specifically mention the Chilterns, it is clear that a major challenge for the planners in finding a suitable route from London to the West Midlands will be how to cross these hills, which in places are designated areas of outstanding national beauty.

Greenguage 21, the pressure group that originally proposed a new line from London to the West Midlands, has suggested a route that would take the line in tunnels under High Wycombe. But this plan envisaged a top speed of only 300 km/h, as adopted for HS1, the Channel Tunnel Rail Link.

But Prof McNaughton said that with new rail technologies 350-360 km/h was already becoming standard. And in countries such as France and Spain new lines were now being planned or built for a maximum of 400 km/h.

“We are playing catch-up now,” he said. “So any new line in Britain should aim to cope with a service speed of 400 km/h — that is 250 mph, half the speed of an aeroplane.”

He gave no hint of any preferred route, but said a proposal for public consultation would definitely be published “before midnight on 31 December.”

A new line would take at least 15 years—seven years for planning and authorisation and eight years to construct as far as the West Midlands.

‘DETERMINED IT WILL BE BUILT’

“But we are determined it will get built,” he added.

Work could start as the Crossrail and Thameslink projects are completed in 2016-17 — retaining skills and jobs, and transferring the annual public budget for Crossrail/Thameslink to HS2, with stage 1 completion in 2022-24.

He said the HS2 company was focusing on the London-West Midlands-North West corridor “which is going to run out of capacity—both on the railways and on the motorways—by 2025.”

The population densities of Greater London, West Midlands, West Yorkshire/Greater Manchester/Merseyside and Strathclyde were ideal for very high speed operations judged against Continental experience.

He likened the corridor to the Paris-Brussells route where rail’s market share had more than doubled since introduction of 300 km/h high-speed Thalys trains. Airline competition had been eliminated, and rail had also eaten into the road market.

Prof McNaughton said HS2 would free up capacity on the existing West Coast Main Line, particularly at the southern end to enable more housing and economic growth around Milton Keynes and in Northamptonshire and Bedfordshire.

The new line would also relieve “suppressed capacity” for more freight trains.

He added that there was as much a business case for releasing capacity on the WCML for more freight and commuter services as there was for a London-Manchester journey time of only 75 minutes.

But the new line’s ‘green credentials’ would depend very much on Government decisions about future electricity generating policies and what fuels were to be used, he said.

With a much larger loading gauge (height and width), the route could carry duplex trains, 400 metres long, compared with a maximum length allowed in Britain now of only 245 metres.

Each train would have 1,100 seats and there would be a train every four minutes, giving 16,500 seats each way per hour—about three times more than Virgin can offer now in a peak hour with 12 x 9-car simplex Pendolinos and one 2 x 4 car Voyager.

With such long trains, many existing stations would be unsuitable, and Prof McNaughton added: “Trying to find a site for a London station is proving something of a challenge.”

Parkway stations along the route would also be important to compete with private car travel and to attract sufficient passengers to justify the project. But the number of stations would have to carefully limited so as not to lose the benefits of high speeds.

“High speed rail is transformational. It is a new transport mode, not just faster rail,” Prof McNaughton emphasised.

He added that magnetic levitation was not being considered because of its high costs and the inability of maglev trains to continue onto ‘classic’ lines.

http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/business/2009/06/01-hs-two.html

 

[bengley]

There was an article in the Bucks Free Press a couple of weeks ago with people going on about how it'll ruin their beautiful area. A load of crap, considering it will be along the current chiltern main line.

 

[stut]

Aye, right. Whereas the M1 widening enhanced it...

 

[Waverley125]

Tunnel costs may increase, but unfortunatley that will have to be born. Britain's a hilly country, and building an HS network is going to mean tunnelling work. However, even if main lines are built for 250, surely the speed limits in the tunnels can be lowered to 200, or even 150? After all, we're not talking about mile after mile of tunnel, are we?

 

[Aussie_Rail]

I hardly think 4 1/2 hours from London to Scotland is forever? However I agree that High Speed rail would improve matters more than any further improvements on either the WCML and ECML could do for this market

I agree, that is not a lot of time to travel from one end of the Country to the other, I always thought it took longer. What sort of trains do they normally run on that route? And how fast does it normally travel at? And does the 'flying Scotsman' still run? When did it stop running that route?

Cheers.

 

[gordonthemoron]

In germany, a lot of the high-speed lines between Cologne & Frankfurt and Nüremberg & Ingolstadt are in tunnels, so what's the problem?

 

[asylumxl]

I agree, that is not a lot of time to travel from one end of the Country to the other, I always thought it took longer. What sort of trains do they normally run on that route? And how fast does it normally travel at? And does the 'flying Scotsman' still run? When did it stop running that route?

Cheers.

Class 91s + MK4 coaches + DVT

Beasts. Operate at 125mph but designed to operate at 140mph.

A few Class 43s + MK3s too north of Edinburgh.

 

[me123]

It's also 4.5 hours on the Pendolinos from London Euston to Glasgow Central. This is, for us, a fantastic improvement.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

is that as the crow flies or following the route?

Following the shortest road route. I appreciate it's not accurate, but it gives a very rough idea.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I hardly think 4 1/2 hours from London to Scotland is forever?

Hmm. It is if you're expecting to do a return journey, plus whatever your business is, in one day.
It is if the southern point isn't within about 30 mins of Kings Cross/Euston.
It is if the northern point isn't within about 30 mins of Waverley or Glasgow Queen Street.

And there are exactly the reasons why travellers fly.

Its misleading to assume that the northern end of a service is simply "Scotland". Even from here in Newcastle ("the north" with some of Scotland being south of here) I can't even do a return to Inverness in a day with enough time to do any productive work - that's 5 1/2 hours each way.

 

[gordonthemoron]

it used to be possible to do newcastle-inverness overnight by using the Edinburgh-Inverness sleeper, however that was stopped prior to privatisation, I used it in 1988

 

[me123]

Hmm. It is if you're expecting to do a return journey, plus whatever your business is, in one day.
It is if the southern point isn't within about 30 mins of Kings Cross/Euston.
It is if the northern point isn't within about 30 mins of Waverley or Glasgow Queen Street.

In one day, you may be pushing it. But remember that the first train now leaves Glasgow for London at 04:25, arriving just after 9am. For a lot of people, that's just as good as flying. Return travel is very possible; I can leave London after 5pm and get to my front door (30 minutes from Glasgow by train+a good walk) by midnight. There's also the Caledonian Sleepers.

Elsewhere, Birmingham, Newcastle, Aberdeen, all easily reachable from Glasgow and from Edinburgh too.

The train is a very competitive rival to the plane. Journey times are much less than they were years ago, and there are plenty of opportunities available. For travel to London City, Birmingham City, Glasgow City, Edinburgh City etc, the train is a very sensible option for plenty of travellers.

And proof of this; My Dad recently went South on the Sleeper and back up on the 17:30; was home by quarter to 11 that night. He was in London anyway. The return was definitely slower by plane, no matter which airport he flew from.

 

[DaveNewcastle]

In one day, you may be pushing it. But remember . . . .
. . . The train is a very competitive rival to the plane. Journey times are much less than they were years ago . . .
. . . And proof of this; My Dad recently went South on the Sleeper and back up on the 17:30; was home by quarter to 11 that night. He was in London anyway. The return was definitely slower by plane . . .

Evidence from examples is always helpful. Thank you.
But evidence which has been selected to support a particular future development must be considered as specious. Sorry

Yeah, I too managed a pretty neat bit of cross-border business today thanks to informed prior-knowledge about rail and bike options. But that sneaky trick was not my point!

1st: The confusion arising from simply equating "London" with "Scotland" leads to lots of failures in analysing the current network,
Think of these as a challenge: -
(and I'm avoiding the extreme examples such as Oban to Plymouth or Stonehaven to Southhampton)

How about looking at what rail can offer for one day's business between any one of, say, Stirling, Perth, Aberdeen, Ayr, Galashiels and Slough, Reading, Brighton, Guildford, Reigate, Leicester, Milton Keynes, Cambridge, Oxford, Tunbridge W. ?
Yes, there are some links that work such as Dundee - Bristol, but you don't have to be far from any of the key "nodes" on the network before the routes become perversly difficult! And ont there and back in day - and This IS the point.

2nd. Can we look at real demand? - not just taking figs from peeps we know on this forum, (not your dad and not me), nor from current road and air numbers ('cos they too reflect the broader infrastructure available now) but from the latent, future, potential demand? This is how the funding is unlocked. Analysing the potential commercial benefit of opening up a new opportunity betweeen any of these Scottish "hubs" and the English "hubs" is where funding might be directed. Especially if these "hubs" are tightly linked to established or developing economic clusters.

We in the north should watch carefully what benefits (if any) accrue from the investment in Ebbsfleet (nobody had heard of it 10 years ago!) and which is the (new) stop on the 180mph CTRL1 . If Ebbsfleet becomes a thriving "new town", some of us might say that was thanks to HS rail.
Either way, its success (or failure) will be used to support (or refute) HS rail connections to other points on the rail map.

 

[Aussie_Rail]

So it looks like the issue is the quality of the journey and the frequency of services. Do over night trains run between London and Edinburgh?

What if the Eurostar service from Paris was extended and terminated at Edinburgh instead? The faster TGV type trains should get there in quicker time?

And if it were possible, could Edinburgh line trains run on their own set of tracks where possible to prevent any delays to the service and other services?

 

[gordonthemoron]

There is one overnight service between london & edinburgh sun-fri in both directions

E* wouldn't get there any quicker at the mo as they are limited to 110mph in the UK, as opposed to 125 for Pendolino, HST & 91s

Not at the moment

 

[Aussie_Rail]

E* wouldn't get there any quicker at the mo as they are limited to 110mph in the UK, as opposed to 125 for Pendolino, HST & 91s

Why are they only limited to 125mph? Is the track different then what is used in France or just the way things are?

I find this interesting, because the XPT is limted to 110kmph when it enters Victoria but can do more in NSW.

 

[gordonthemoron]

Eurostars are limited to 110 in the UK, north of london they have only ever run as far as Leeds & York. On WCML, non-tilting trains (including E*) are limited to 110, not sure why there is a limit on ECML but the OHLE is rather dodgy, especially further north

 

[Metroland]

The service on the ECML is roughly hourly from London – Edinburgh

The service on the WCML will be hourly from London – Glasgow very shortly.

In addition to that, you have hourly services from Birmingham – Glasgow/Ediburgh, and Transpennine express services north of Preston from the NW too. There are also additional, almost hourly services north of Newcastle.

So actually the service frequency is very good. In terms of timing, the London-Edinburgh/Glasgow time is just over 4 hours, which is actually pretty competitive in getting from a typical point in the large Scottish city to typical point in London, compared to air, and certainly road.

There are no air services from Liverpool – London, a very reduced service from Manchester, none now from Durham, or Leeds, and reducing toward Newcastle and central Scotland.

A word of warning: Many people typically make the mistake of thinking a new HSL is about reducing times from say London-central Scotland. It must be remembered that on the ECML only 4% of passengers are travelling between London and Edinburgh and even less from London to Glasgow. Most people on these trains are travelling from intermediate points. You have to think of the railway as a ‘network’.

More to the point, a new line would be about capacity. Both the ECML and especially the WCML are very busy with stopping passenger trains and freight, indeed, the intercity services only make up a modest proportion of overall passengers.

South of Newcastle you are primarily attracting passengers from road, north there of from air. It has to be remembered the roads are also very congested in this country. The country has a huge north south divide, driven by transport, this would be another reason for a HSL.

Current modal share

London - Scotland

Air 64%
Rail 24%
Car 6%
Coach 3%

London - North West

Car 46%
Rail 40%
Air 8%
Coach 5%

London - North East

Rail 52%
Car 24%
Air 21%
Coach 3%

London - Yorkshire/Humber

Car 49%
Rail 39%
Coach 9%
Air 2%

London - West Midlands

Car 73%
Rail 20%
Coach 6%
Air 0%

London - East Midlands

Car 62%
Rail 33%
Coach 4%
Air 0%


http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedtwo/highspeedtwo.pdf

Finally, both the ECML and WCML trains have 140mph trains, but only run at 125mph because of limits with the infrastructure, so it’s not an issue of raw speed.

 

[Aussie_Rail]

Eurostars are limited to 110 in the UK, north of london they have only ever run as far as Leeds & York. On WCML, non-tilting trains (including E*) are limited to 110, not sure why there is a limit on ECML but the OHLE is rather dodgy, especially further north

Ok, fair enough, so what does 'WCML', 'ECML' & 'OHLE' stand for?

Cheers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The service on the ECML is roughly hourly from London – Edinburgh

The service on the WCML will be hourly from London – Glasgow very shortly.

In addition to that, you have hourly services from Birmingham – Glasgow/Ediburgh, and Transpennine express services north of Preston from the NW too. There are also additional, almost hourly services north of Newcastle.

So actually the service frequency is very good. In terms of timing, the London-Edinburgh/Glasgow time is just over 4 hours, which is actually pretty competitive in getting from a typical point in the large Scottish city to typical point in London, compared to air, and certainly road.

There are no air services from Liverpool – London, a very reduced service from Manchester, none now from Durham, or Leeds, and reducing toward Newcastle and central Scotland.

A word of warning: Many people typically make the mistake of thinking a new HSL is about reducing times from say London-central Scotland. It must be remembered that on the ECML only 4% of passengers are travelling between London and Edinburgh and even less from London to Glasgow. Most people on these trains are travelling from intermediate points. You have to think of the railway as a ‘network’.

More to the point, a new line would be about capacity. Both the ECML and especially the WCML are very busy with stopping passenger trains and freight, indeed, the intercity services only make up a modest proportion of overall passengers.

South of Newcastle you are primarily attracting passengers from road, north there of from air. It has to be remembered the roads are also very congested in this country. The country has a huge north south divide, driven by transport, this would be another reason for a HSL.

Current modal share

London - Scotland

Air 64%
Rail 24%
Car 6%
Coach 3%

London - North West

Car 46%
Rail 40%
Air 8%
Coach 5%

London - North East

Rail 52%
Car 24%
Air 21%
Coach 3%

London - Yorkshire/Humber

Car 49%
Rail 39%
Coach 9%
Air 2%

London - West Midlands

Car 73%
Rail 20%
Coach 6%
Air 0%

London - East Midlands

Car 62%
Rail 33%
Coach 4%
Air 0%


http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/rail/pi/highspeedtwo/highspeedtwo.pdf

Finally, both the ECML and WCML trains have 140mph trains, but only run at 125mph because of limits with the infrastructure, so it’s not an issue of raw speed.

Thanks for that, that does make plenty of sense, I couldn't imagine anyone making a daily commute that far, but the idea about the intermediate stops does make perfect sense.

Thanks.

 

[gordonthemoron]

WCML - West Coast Main Line, London Euston to Glasgow via a load of places in the middle of nowhere
ECML - East Coast Main Line, London Kings Cross to Edinburgh via York & Newcastle
OHLE - Overhead Line Electrification/Equipment

 

[Aussie_Rail]

WCML - West Coast Main Line, London Euston to Glasgow via a load of places in the middle of nowhere
ECML - East Coast Main Line, London Kings Cross to Edinburgh via York & Newcastle
OHLE - Overhead Line Electrification/Equipment

Thanks for clearing that up, makes perfect sense now.

Cheers.

 

[Metroland]

I think the other thing the government is getting nervous about is we are getting very behind with high speed rail. Poor transport is not good for inward investment and costs business a lot of money.

Most countries now have extensive HSR planned, China alone has 10,000km planned by 2020, even the USA now has 10 lines planned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_high-speed_rail_by_country

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_Europe