High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[Nym]

Not by that much though...

 

[TrainBoy98]

Couple of things I was thinking about;

1) If theres going to be a station at Crewe, why not have a branch of HS2 from there to Liverpool?
2) Could the HS2 East Midlands station be intergrated into the current East Midlands Parkway station?
3) Does Birmingham have to be a terminus? Couldnt trains run from London through Birmingham (stopping of course) and then on to the norther branches?
4) Will better connections be provided at Sheffield for transfering between HS2 and normal rail?

 

[steamdrivenand]

Couple of things I was thinking about;

1) If theres going to be a station at Crewe, why not have a branch of HS2 from there to Liverpool?
2) Could the HS2 East Midlands station be intergrated into the current East Midlands Parkway station?
3) Does Birmingham have to be a terminus? Couldnt trains run from London through Birmingham (stopping of course) and then on to the norther branches?
4) Will better connections be provided at Sheffield for transfering between HS2 and normal rail?

1) It would appear that an HS2 line to Liverpool was never even considered by the Consultant Engineers as there's no mention of such an option in their research and submissions. This suggests that HS2 Ltd never asked them to look at that option and either they received instructions from the Labour Government not to do so, or had somehow discounted it beforehand. Given their remit was to get the line north, taking in Manchester, then the chance of a long high speed spur of to the west was probably v slim.
Also by using current lines into Liverpool you obviate the need for a brand new station by using trains of similar dimensions to those used at present. Captive high speed trains are longer than you can fit in Lime Street and their double decker height may be an issue too.
As it is Crewe will have no Captive train platforms, just a tunnel for them to pass through. The Liverpool bound trains will be Classic Compatibles that come off HS2 just before Crewe and assume current lines and speeds. Not all may stop at Crewe and they may well run fast through to Lime Street.

2) There are other experts on EMP on here but I think the problem may be that the alignment isn't right etc.

3) I guess you're suggesting a line that runs right through Birmingham, in one side and out the other. That's what the Victorians did when they built our current railways, but don't forget the cities were tiny then and hardly anyone had the vote. These days getting a spur in and out is bad enough. Imagine doubling the problems and land cost etc. You'll notice that HS2 really only uses through and through stations where they're being built as Parkways outside the relevant cities. In essence both Manchester stations, Leeds and Birmingham Central are on spurs.

4) According to the plans the whole Meadowhall train/HS2/tram interchange will be incorporated in a new station which will presumably provide better interchange facilities than at present. Having used both train and tram and car to/from Meadowhall they're pretty good at the moment and adding HS2 will be the icing on the cake.

 

[Chris125]

1) If theres going to be a station at Crewe, why not have a branch of HS2 from there to Liverpool?

There's not going to be a HS2 station at Crewe, the existing station will be used for services leaving the new line which burrows underneath.

As for a dedicated spur, there simply isn't sufficient demand to justify the cost - today Liverpool only justifies one hourly Virgin service to Euston compared to Manchester's three which illustrates the difference in underlying demand. An upgrade of the line to allow captive units was considered but the cost and disruption ruled it out, while the benefits of a regular service to Crewe and Runcorn outweighed a faster service to Lime St. A dedicated line could always be considered in the future however should a viable business case emerge.

2) Could the HS2 East Midlands station be intergrated into the current East Midlands Parkway station?

If you mean integrating it with the Toton station then no, HS2 will be several miles away on the opposite side of the Trent. A station at Parkway was ruled out relatively early on due to the expense of building a station there and the inability to develop or regenerate the surrounding land.

3) Does Birmingham have to be a terminus? Couldnt trains run from London through Birmingham (stopping of course) and then on to the norther branches?

Diverting passengers through Birmingham at massive cost and probably longer journey times serves no useful purpose if they aren't joining or leaving the train, the service frequency planned will be more than sufficient. It's worth remembering that for intercity services Birmingham, like Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Nottingham are already operated as branches off the main through route.

4) Will better connections be provided at Sheffield for transfering between HS2 and normal rail?

The station will be rebuilt/moved to improve the interchange and if i remember correctly there are already something like 9tph from Meadowhall into the city which will probably be electrified by the time HS2 opens.

Chris

 

[brianthegiant]

Couple of things I was thinking about;

1) If theres going to be a station at Crewe, why not have a branch of HS2 from there to Liverpool?
2) Could the HS2 East Midlands station be intergrated into the current East Midlands Parkway station?
3) Does Birmingham have to be a terminus? Couldnt trains run from London through Birmingham (stopping of course) and then on to the norther branches?
4) Will better connections be provided at Sheffield for transfering between HS2 and normal rail?

Re 2) combining with existing EMD would allow better connections with north-south MML services, but NOT with E-W DBY-NOT services.
Toton has everything going for it: oodles of brownfield site with adjacent industrial units, access to M1, Tram, near to Long Eaton/Stapleford/Chilwell. The idea seems well received by local MPS & council leaders.

HS2@ EMD would be on a curve which is not ideal for platforms, it would be constrained for space between Ratcliffe power station, A453, River Soar, Redhill Marina, & on a greenfield site.

All in all HS2 @ EMD was never going to happen.

 

[steamdrivenand]

There's not going to be a HS2 station at Crewe, the existing station will be used for services leaving the new line which burrows underneath.

As I understand it Crewe Station was up for rebuilding anyway. They started work on Phase 1 (a new southern people entry, taxi rank, passenger drop off etc) last month.

HS2 is going straight through underneath in a tunnel that starts about a couple of kilometres south and I guess they'll use the opportunity to remodel the rest of the current above ground station and bring it up to modern standards. The Press has been a bit misleading as they've generally given the impression that Crewe will be an HS2 station which is not strictly the case.

 

[swt_passenger]

Crewe is in a bit of a special situation though, because the detailed maps/diagrams show grade separated connections both north and south of the station. So the implication is that 'classic compatible' trains will be able to run off HS2, through the station, and then back onto HS2, in both directions.

Previously, I was only really aware of the idea of the 'compatibles' leaving HS2 onto branches to non-HS destinations, ie a call at Crewe for any northbound train would mean the rest of the journey would be on the normal network - hence the earlier worry that trains would use the ECML between Crewe and Liverpool. A couple of weeks back, I think most people were expecting a branch off from the south towards Crewe only.

So as it turns out, Crewe seems to be a bit of a unique case for HS2, comparable with the situation at Ashford on HS1. I believe most people would consider that Ashford International has a station on HS1?

 

[HSTEd]

Hopefully all the new trackwork around Crewe will be cleared structurally for a full HS2 loading gauge to enable possible improvements to the station in future in combination with any further extensions to the line and the like.

 

[steamdrivenand]

Crewe is in a bit of a special situation though, because the detailed maps/diagrams show grade separated connections both north and south of the station. So the implication is that 'classic compatible' trains will be able to run off HS2, through the station, and then back onto HS2, in both directions.

Previously, I was only really aware of the idea of the 'compatibles' leaving HS2 onto branches to non-HS destinations, ie a call at Crewe for any northbound train would mean the rest of the journey would be on the normal network - hence the earlier worry that trains would use the ECML between Crewe and Liverpool. A couple of weeks back, I think most people were expecting a branch off from the south towards Crewe only.

I've just had another quick look at the DfT drawings swt because I too understood it was only connected to the south of the station. Whilst a grade separated connection south of Crewe is shown there isn't any mention of one to the north. Indeed HS2 emerges from the tunnel at the northern edge of the Crewe conurbation and almost immediately the WCML bears away north west and HS2 heads on almost due north.

So Crewe passengers will only be able to travel south on the HS2 in Compatible stock from Merseyside etc and Captive ex Manchester trains can't stop. I'm expecting that Compatibles from Scotland (if connected) and other northern cities will join HS2 near Wigan and again won't stop at Crewe going south. Of course they could stay on WCML metals to Crewe and stop, but that would add 5 minutes or so to their journey south.

And of course with 20 years to go they may well decide to reconfigure Crewe or anywhere else in the meantime.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Hopefully all the new trackwork around Crewe will be cleared structurally for a full HS2 loading gauge to enable possible improvements to the station in future in combination with any further extensions to the line and the like.

I'm not sure they'll ever be able to handle double decker 400m Captives at Crewe above ground, due to bridge height restrictions. I guess they could build platforms for them underground in the tunnel but they'd only be able to go due north to Manchester and beyond without building a junction somewhere north of Crewe.

And then the only destination would be Liverpool and you'd have to build a new station somewhere there because Lime Street is totally inappropriate for Captives.

I think the current aspiration is to keep HS2 line as clean and tidy as possible for high speed running to avoid speed restrictions.

 

[Sidious]

Tomorrow's Independent reports that, in addition to the existing judicial review in the name of Buckinghamshire council, others are already being considered which may see the HS2 scheme delayed for as long as 10 further years.

These endless legal challenges should not be allowed to happen. I appreciate that there will be people who are against HS2 for a variety of reasons, but so far the only ones who appear to be making any real noise about it, are those who live close to the proposed route.

It should be borne in mind that at the last General Election all three major political parties had a commitment to build HS2 in their manifesto. At some point there will be a parliamentary bill to authorise construction. I don't see how it is democratic for a consortium of county councils (led by Buckinghamshire) to spend tax payer's money to bring legal challenges to the will of parliament.

Of course the synic could say build a station in the Chilterns a bit like TGV Haut Picardie which doesn't really serve any major population centre, but would placate the local population to make them think they are getting something tangible to benefit them from the project...

 

[HSTEd]

And I overestimated the time delay brought about by OOC style intermediate stations... even with 360kph running they estimate 30 seconds of delay to non stop trains.

A couple of mintues for multiple stations and a reduction to 320kph running to purchase the capacity sounds reasonable for me... but then I am me.
(And a station at Amersham might be useful to placate the locals in the Chilterns, especially if it can be made to connect with the end of the Metropolitan line).

 

[Chris125]

Crewe is in a bit of a special situation though, because the detailed maps/diagrams show grade separated connections both north and south of the station.

The relevant map shows no northern connection at Crewe.

As for gauge clearing Crewe, with no plans for captive stock to run into the station (which would then need platforms incompatible with 'classic' rolling stock) that would be pretty unlikely. Even if the dedicated network were to be extended at some point, a new or remodelled station may well be needed regardless if captive sets were to be used.

Chris

 

[swt_passenger]

I'm pretty sure there was a northern grade separated junction a couple of days ago. Have they changed a drawing?

 

[nerd]

I'm pretty sure there was a northern grade separated junction a couple of days ago. Have they changed a drawing?

nope - your recollection seems particular to you. I agree it is a somwhat confusing diagramme in the command paper; but it shows no northwards facing link back on HS2 Phase 2 north of Crewe and never has.

 

[HSTEd]

Is the 18tph proposed going to be the actual timetable as ita ppears the planned infrastructure can support 24 theoretical paths per hour.

That means perhaps 22 paths per hour to run the 18 trains per hour, if we assume that we reserve two of the theoretical paths for timetable recovery. With a near symmetrical braking/acceleration curve (ie. 100% regenerative braking over most of the traction range) station dwells will be 150 seconds or so (ie. one whole path).

 

[si404]

23 theoretical paths per hour. But you can't you can't really run more than 19 paths in practice due to reliability.

That said, if I get what you are saying, that means that you might be able to get a couple of trains stop at, say, Aylesbury, provided there's a spare path to slot into at the end.

 

[HSTEd]

23 theoretical paths per hour. But you can't you can't really run more than 19 paths in practice due to reliability.

That said, if I get what you are saying, that means that you might be able to get a couple of trains stop at, say, Aylesbury, provided there's a spare path to slot into at the end.

Well if you bite the bullet and simply axe any compatible trains that miss the relevant path, you can probably get closer to the theoretical than 19.
And remember we already have more than 18 paths unless you are planning no stops whatsoever at Old Oak Common (or every train stopping there, which is a little much for only three platforms for each direction).

And remember you can do clever flights by careful positioning of stops in the timetable to get more than one use from each "empty" path.

 

[si404]

And remember we already have more than 18 paths unless you are planning no stops whatsoever at Old Oak Common (or every train stopping there, which is a little much for only three platforms for each direction).

All trains will stop there at OOC. Hardly 'a little much' - with three platforms, then that's a lot of time to wait at the station before going to Euston for three platforms to be a problem - each platform gets 6tph - the trains don't need to stop more than 2 or 3 minutes at OOC, unless you need to add three minutes (as all trains are stopping, you don't) for deceleration/accleration either side there shouldn't be a problem.

 

[HSTEd]

All trains will stop there at OOC. Hardly 'a little much' - with three platforms, then that's a lot of time to wait at the station before going to Euston for three platforms to be a problem - each platform gets 6tph - the trains don't need to stop more than 2 or 3 minutes at OOC, unless you need to add three minutes (as all trains are stopping, you don't) for deceleration/accleration either side there shouldn't be a problem.

Alright then.... I assume this means 4 track north from Birmingham International to the junction complex?

Since otherwise you would have serious issues at the north end of the line.
Unless they are going to make all trains stop there as well... which would be rather disingenuous considering they list journey times including only a stop at OOC.

 

[Nym]

It it four track from Birmingham International through the Delta Junction and Wye Junction to the North...

 

[AndyLandy]

If you fit more seats in per metre of absolute length, then you must reduce the seat pitch, it's as simple as that... If I was to use the same seat pitch as the IEP is looking at I'd come out at a similar level of capacity. I also wouldn't need to gauge clear the entire railway all over again...

I thought we'd already established elsewhere that 26m IEP doesn't actually require all that much in the way of re-gauging. It's all documented in one of the IEP threads...

Diverting passengers through Birmingham at massive cost and probably longer journey times serves no useful purpose if they aren't joining or leaving the train, the service frequency planned will be more than sufficient. It's worth remembering that for intercity services Birmingham, like Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds and Nottingham are already operated as branches off the main through route.

I can't really argue with the cost aspect, but I find it surprising that it would make much difference to timings whether you go via BHI or the City Centre. The thing that particularly surprises me is that there seems to be little demand for Intercity journeys between non-London cities. I'm no expert, but I'd have thought that there must be a reasonable amount of demand on the Birmingham-Manchester corridor.

 

[Chris125]

I can't really argue with the cost aspect, but I find it surprising that it would make much difference to timings whether you go via BHI or the City Centre. The thing that particularly surprises me is that there seems to be little demand for Intercity journeys between non-London cities. I'm no expert, but I'd have thought that there must be a reasonable amount of demand on the Birmingham-Manchester corridor.

Though it might not make a huge difference to the west leg of HS2 (though the cumulative effect would still be felt), clearly it would add up to those heading to Leeds and Newcastle and presumably more trains would also be stopping at Birmingham, also adding to journey times.

With all the other costs and drawbacks it just doesn't make sense, lets be honest Birmingham is not losing out when it comes HS2.

Chris

 

[jon0844]

Not sure if anyone has mentioned it here yet, but here's something to put the £32/33bn into context;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-21298117

The cost of cleaning up the Sellafield nuclear waste site has reached £67.5bn with no sign of when the cost will stop rising, according to a report.

 

[HSTEd]

Though it might not make a huge difference to the west leg of HS2 (though the cumulative effect would still be felt), clearly it would add up to those heading to Leeds and Newcastle and presumably more trains would also be stopping at Birmingham, also adding to journey times.

With all the other costs and drawbacks it just doesn't make sense, lets be honest Birmingham is not losing out when it comes HS2.

Chris

It doesn't really cost very much at all in time terms, remember that even at 320kph High Speed trains eat up a kilometre every eleven seconds.
But I suppose it would cost a lot more for not that much gain... so oh well.

 

[si404]

Alright then.... I assume this means 4 track north from Birmingham International to the junction complex?

There will be 4-tracks from S of Birmingham Interchange to the NE-NW split. The junctions will have access from both pairs (Birmingham Interchange and non-stop) of tracks.

 

[HSTEd]

Doing that with full grade seperation is going to be fun.....

 

[Geezertronic]

Doing that with full grade seperation is going to be fun.....

Birmingham was in need of a new Spaghetti Junction of some sorts

 

[Oswyntail]

Apologies if this has been asked before, but I couldn't find it.
In a piece in the Independent that has just been brought to my notice, it says that the spur from the Manchester section to the WCML is going to cross Chat Moss. I cannot find any map to confirm whether this is true or not, but it seems unlikely, most obviously on environmental grounds.
Is this the case?

 

[steamdrivenand]

It's planned to run west of Culcheth, roughly following the curves of an old trackbed (sorry don't know the area and the name of the old line).

So Culcheth will be between HS2 and Chat Moss.

Oh and in reality that's not a spur, that's the main HS2, Manchester is on a spur.

 

[Oswyntail]

It's planned to run west of Culcheth, roughly following the curves of an old trackbed (sorry don't know the area and the name of the old line).

So Culcheth will be between HS2 and Chat Moss.

Oh and in reality that's not a spur, that's the main HS2, Manchester is on a spur.

Thanks
And you try telling Mancunians their city is on a spur. Heavens, they think London is the one on a spur