High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[RichmondCommu]

So nobody worries about Northeners' "hearts and minds" when it comes to spending billions on London, but when the same funding stream starts being spent on HS2 (once Crossrail has been completed), we have to keep those down south happy?

(removes tongue from cheek)

Its worth remembering who funds all the public sector jobs that dominate Northern towns. Not only that but I don't think you can compare the funding streams for Crossrail and HS2, especially when you consider the amount of private funding that is paying for Crossrail. Let alone the difference between £20bn and £50bn.

We who are in favour of HS2 ignore hearts and minds at our peril.

 

[tbtc]

Its worth remembering who funds all the public sector jobs that dominate Northern towns. Not only that but I don't think you could campare the funding streams for Crossrail and HS2, especially when you consider the amount of private funding that is paying for Crossrail. Let alone the difference between £20bn and £50bn.

We who are in favour of HS2 ignore hearts and minds at our peril.

You're never going to be able to make long term decisions (like today's nuclear plant announcement) by pandering to short term populism - and HS2 is a long term scheme.

(and I've never worked in the public sector, but thanks for funding us)

 

[Philip Elliott]

Manchester - 3tph @
Birmingham - 3tph* @
Liverpool - 2tph*
Newcastle - 2tph
Leeds - 3tph @
York - 1tph
Preston - 1tph
Scotland - 2tph #
+Space for international/Heathrow (if built)

*One suggestion of portion working of a Liverpool and Birmingham service but will certainly be abandoned once the timing implication is assessed.

@ Captive

# Non stop north of Preston

Nothing left after that.

Source - HS2 ltd.

 

[RichmondCommu]

You're never going to be able to make long term decisions (like today's nuclear plant announcement) by pandering to short term populism - and HS2 is a long term scheme.

(and I've never worked in the public sector, but thanks for funding us)

Hang on a minute, where and when have I suggested that you work or indeed have worked in the public sector?

In all fairness, given the recent hikes in the price of gas people are going to quickly accept the need for more nuclear power stations. I'm not so sure that the same could be said for HS2

 

[Metrailway]

So nobody worries about Northeners' "hearts and minds" when it comes to spending billions on London, but when the same funding stream starts being spent on HS2 (once Crossrail has been completed), we have to keep those down south happy?

(removes tongue from cheek)

If you believe YouGov, Northerners are more opposed to HS2 when compared to Londoners or Southerners. It is why the Government have recently rebranded HS2 a "north-south" railway in interviews and press releases, as many in the North of England believe the project is purely for the benefit of the South.

 

[HSTEd]

Manchester - 3tph @
Birmingham - 3tph* @
Liverpool - 2tph*
Newcastle - 2tph
Leeds - 3tph @
York - 1tph
Preston - 1tph
Scotland - 2tph #
+Space for international/Heathrow (if built)

*One suggestion of portion working of a Liverpool and Birmingham service but will certainly be abandoned once the timing implication is assessed.

@ Captive

# Non stop north of Preston

Nothing left after that.

Source - HS2 ltd.

So no portion working of those 200m sets at all?
You are so far ahead by the time you get to Wigan/Preston that stopping for a few minutes to split off another set is not going to put you behind what they achieve now.

If there is no portion working there is no reason to have 200m compatible sets and we can go for full length ones.

Also the two sets per hour to Scotland are supposed to run coupled up to Carstairs, so that is already one inaccuracy in this 'plan' of yours.

 

[Metrailway]

Also the two sets per hour to Scotland are supposed to run coupled up to Carstairs, so that is already one inaccuracy in this 'plan' of yours.

What is inaccurate about Philip's plan? If I'm looking at the correct economic case for HS2, it has 2tph London to Carstairs, where both trains split, to provide 2tph each to Edinburgh and Glasgow after phase 2 is finished.

 

[clc]

What is inaccurate about Philip's plan? If I'm looking at the correct economic case for HS2, it has 2tph London to Carstairs, where both trains split, to provide 2tph each to Edinburgh and Glasgow after phase 2 is finished.

I think the bit about being non stop north of Preston is inaccurate.

Would it not be better to split at Preston if stopping there anyway rather than stopping again at Carstairs?

 

[Ironside]

I think the bit about being non stop north of Preston is inaccurate.

Would it not be better to split at Preston if stopping there anyway rather than stopping again at Carstairs?

It would be faster but perhaps their are challenges with taking up two paths rather than one between Preston and Carstairs?

 

[joeykins82]

Network Rail's post-HS2 options study is a great read and looks in reasonable detail at redesigning the entire post-HS2 service pattern around a hub & spoke strategy where HS2 captive services operate. There's a diagram centred on Crewe as an example looking at the provision of 4tph feeder services from Wolverhampton, Shrewsbury, Cheste, Liverpool, Wigan/Warrington, Stockport, Longton/Stoke and Tamworth/Lichfield/Stafford.

An Integrated (One Network) Approach
The characteristics of the Integrated Connectivity Approach would be:

• a national network fully integrated with HS2.
• HS2 stations fed by the existing network wherever possible.
• long distance services principally delivered by the high speed lines.
• released capacity used to improve connectivity across the existing network.

The ideal is that where appropriate, HS2 is used as the primary means for long distance “hub to hub” services, and the existing network primarily for “hub and spoke” suburban, inter-urban and freight services.

NR high-speed rail page
PDF: study document

 

[MarkyT]

Throughout continental European HS services have developed progressively by concentrating trains onto the new trunk corridors, then diverging to multiple destinations via classic routes, thus spreading the benefit of and support for the new construction. Spain even has gauge changing units and bi-modes to achieve this. Europe in general has many fewer compatibility issues to overcome, and it seems a missed opportunity not to learn from their example and run through to as many viable destinations as possible using UK classic compatible sets. Splitting and joining 200m sets at Birmingham and Crewe would be a very good way of achieving this, perhaps with some additional junction connections, allowing HS service to be provided to Wolverhampton then on to Manchester via Stafford and Stoke (in addition to the fast captive services running via Crewe).

http://www.townend.me/files/hs2birmingham.pdf

 

[jon0844]

The best thing for HS2 will be the construction of more HS lines with European gauging, so people can gain capacity through far more spacious trains.

We usually look at the length of trains here, but forget that to cram in seats on a commuter service, we've gone for 3+2 which is horrible.. but not so when you have a wider gauge. Suddenly 3+2 is luxurious, with lots more standing room and places for buggies/bikes that still allows people free movement.

Classic compatibles will obviously be required for some time, but I do hope that someone is thinking beyond HS2. I know it might seem hard to do when nobody is sure if/when HS2 will be built, let alone the next 50-100 years of the railway!

 

[MarkyT]

The best thing for HS2 will be the construction of more HS lines with European gauging, so people can gain capacity through far more spacious trains.

Euro loading gauge lines needn't always be entirely new construction though. Sometimes increased gauging on existing lines might be economic. For instance an alternative (much cheaper?) approach to Manchester might diverge south of Wigan on the interconnection to the classic Scottish route, then join the classic L&M into new platforms using the former Exchange station area, for easy interchange with everything going through Victoria. Extra tracks at platforms, and junctions and flyovers approaching the terminus would be required clearly, but elsewhere the existing parts of the corridor have few over-structures and only three intermediate stations. Clearly this is longer than the official south approach but imagine going full tilt non-stop from Euston nearly all the way to Wigan, then doing the last 12 miles or so at classic speeds.

http://www.townend.me/files/HS2-L&M.pdf

 

[HSTEd]

The best thing for HS2 will be the construction of more HS lines with European gauging, so people can gain capacity through far more spacious trains.

We usually look at the length of trains here, but forget that to cram in seats on a commuter service, we've gone for 3+2 which is horrible.. but not so when you have a wider gauge. Suddenly 3+2 is luxurious, with lots more standing room and places for buggies/bikes that still allows people free movement.

Classic compatibles will obviously be required for some time, but I do hope that someone is thinking beyond HS2. I know it might seem hard to do when nobody is sure if/when HS2 will be built, let alone the next 50-100 years of the railway!

Unfortunately the gauge isn't that much wider.

If this route was being built to Shinkansen standards then perhaps, but we are unfortunately stuck with 2+2 at the rule.
Double decks is where the capacity enhancemetn comes from I think.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Euro loading gauge lines needn't always be entirely new construction though. Sometimes increased gauging on existing lines might be economic. For instance an alternative (much cheaper?) approach to Manchester might diverge south of Wigan on the interconnection to the classic Scottish route, then join the classic L&M into new platforms using the former Exchange station area, for easy interchange with everything going through Victoria. Extra tracks at platforms, and junctions and flyovers approaching the terminus would be required clearly, but elsewhere the existing parts of the corridor have few over-structures and only three intermediate stations. Clearly this is longer than the official south approach but imagine going full tilt non-stop from Euston nearly all the way to Wigan, then doing the last 12 miles or so at classic speeds.

http://www.townend.me/files/HS2-L&M.pdf

Considering the line between York and Newcastle was deemed to be as expensive to gauge clear as a new HSL, I somehow doubt this would be the optimum economic solution.

 

[HowardGWR]

Throughout continental European HS services have developed progressively by concentrating trains onto the new trunk corridors, then diverging to multiple destinations via classic routes, thus spreading the benefit of and support for the new construction. Spain even has gauge changing units and bi-modes to achieve this. Europe in general has many fewer compatibility issues to overcome, and it seems a missed opportunity not to learn from their example and run through to as many viable destinations as possible using UK classic compatible sets. Splitting and joining 200m sets at Birmingham and Crewe would be a very good way of achieving this, perhaps with some additional junction connections, allowing HS service to be provided to Wolverhampton then on to Manchester via Stafford and Stoke (in addition to the fast captive services running via Crewe).

http://www.townend.me/files/hs2birmingham.pdf

This diagram (thanks Mark) gives image to that which I suggested a while back and was said not to be possible. I was talking about Cardiff / Bristol to Leeds (and so on) using CCs. We should not get fixated on the idea that Curzon St is only station that could handle trains from / to HS2. I am sure the planners are not (hope not anyway).

 

[GingerSte]

This diagram (thanks Mark) gives image to that which I suggested a while back and was said not to be possible. I was talking about Cardiff / Bristol to Leeds (and so on) using CCs. We should not get fixated on the idea that Curzon St is only station that could handle trains from / to HS2. I am sure the planners are not (hope not anyway).

Just turning that last idea on its head for a minute. Forgive me a touch of Blue-Sky thinking!

What is to say that Curzon Street only has to serve HS2? It is said that one of the problems with New Street is capacity, and that the current upgrade won't solve that. 2 or 4 classic platforms at Curzon Street would spread the load from New Street, however.

As I understand it, Curzon Street will be almost over the east approach to New Street. With only minor modifications to the scheme, you could connect Curzon Street to the Water Orton Line, giving connection to Derby, Nottingham and Leicester. There would be the "diesel train inside a new train shed" issue to deal with, though (unless Birmingham-Derby/Leicester gets OHLE).

This could also be used as a terminus for the Camp Hill Line that periodically gets mentioned. As I understand it, the required chord at Bordesley is part of the cost-based killer for this project. However, the Camp Hill Line is connected by a chord to New Street's eastern approach.

Perhaps the easiest line to connect, though, would be the northern portion of the Cross-City line. I realise that splitting the Cross City wouldn't be popular, hence the Camp Hill line connection. There would still be a reversal, but most of the Cross-City connections would still be there (with the exception of those stations between Birmingham New Street and Kings Norton, which could still be worked by shuttles).

 

[IKBrunel]

There are probably numerous places where we'd like to see more junctions with classic lines, to allow diversionary routes, maintenance train access, future routes, etc. Trent Junction with MML would be another example.

But the HS2 drawings seems to indicate a very minimal number of junctions, presumably since junctions are a major addition to failures & maintenance cost.

At the very least I would hope passive provision for some can be made in civils stuctures so points & track can be added at a later date if need be, but I suspect value engineering will delete any such aspirations to keep costs under control.

 

[JamesRowden]

Just turning that last idea on its head for a minute. Forgive me a touch of Blue-Sky thinking!

What is to say that Curzon Street only has to serve HS2? It is said that one of the problems with New Street is capacity, and that the current upgrade won't solve that. 2 or 4 classic platforms at Curzon Street would spread the load from New Street, however.

As I understand it, Curzon Street will be almost over the east approach to New Street. With only minor modifications to the scheme, you could connect Curzon Street to the Water Orton Line, giving connection to Derby, Nottingham and Leicester. There would be the "diesel train inside a new train shed" issue to deal with, though (unless Birmingham-Derby/Leicester gets OHLE).

This could also be used as a terminus for the Camp Hill Line that periodically gets mentioned. As I understand it, the required chord at Bordesley is part of the cost-based killer for this project. However, the Camp Hill Line is connected by a chord to New Street's eastern approach.

Perhaps the easiest line to connect, though, would be the northern portion of the Cross-City line. I realise that splitting the Cross City wouldn't be popular, hence the Camp Hill line connection. There would still be a reversal, but most of the Cross-City connections would still be there (with the exception of those stations between Birmingham New Street and Kings Norton, which could still be worked by shuttles).

I have been thinking of a similar idea recently.

If a connection from HS2 to New Street was built at Duddeston and a connection was built from Coventry to Birmingham Interchange, the mainline services via Coventry (from the WCML and the Thames Valley) would not need to run through the metro stations. This might produce more capacity overall, diversionary routes during engineering works and better connections between mainline and HS2 services at Birmingham Interchange.

 

[Martin222002]

Throughout continental European HS services have developed progressively by concentrating trains onto the new trunk corridors, then diverging to multiple destinations via classic routes, thus spreading the benefit of and support for the new construction. Spain even has gauge changing units and bi-modes to achieve this. Europe in general has many fewer compatibility issues to overcome, and it seems a missed opportunity not to learn from their example and run through to as many viable destinations as possible using UK classic compatible sets. Splitting and joining 200m sets at Birmingham and Crewe would be a very good way of achieving this, perhaps with some additional junction connections, allowing HS service to be provided to Wolverhampton then on to Manchester via Stafford and Stoke (in addition to the fast captive services running via Crewe).

http://www.townend.me/files/hs2birmingham.pdf

This diagram (thanks Mark) gives image to that which I suggested a while back and was said not to be possible. I was talking about Cardiff / Bristol to Leeds (and so on) using CCs. We should not get fixated on the idea that Curzon St is only station that could handle trains from / to HS2. I am sure the planners are not (hope not anyway).

I had also thought that this could be a good way for HS2 to better serve the West Midlands areas, and would allow the potential for HS2 services from the North East and West to serve the South West and South Wales.

London to Birmingham HS2 services via Birmingham New Street would also be able to serve other destinations as well as Woverhampton, such as towards Shrewsbury, Walsall, and towards Worcester, electrification permitting.

Another form of positional working which I think would work well would be the inter-working of London to Liverpool and Preston services, which would give Warrington and Wigan a half hourly / 2tph to and from London, over the 1tph currently proposed. This would also free up one of the Birmingham services to operate at full length rather than having a Liverpool portion.

 

[southern442]

I had also thought that this could be a good way for HS2 to better serve the West Midlands areas, and would allow the potential for HS2 services from the North East and West to serve the South West and South Wales.

London to Birmingham HS2 services via Birmingham New Street would also be able to serve other destinations as well as Woverhampton, such as towards Shrewsbury, Walsall, and towards Worcester, electrification permitting.

Another form of positional working which I think would work well would be the inter-working of London to Liverpool and Preston services, which would give Warrington and Wigan a half hourly / 2tph to and from London, over the 1tph currently proposed. This would also free up one of the Birmingham services to operate at full length rather than having a Liverpool portion.

An idea would be to create a 3-platform underground copy of New street station, and then you could have faster Wolverhampton trains, freeing up the WCML a little.

 

[WatcherZero]

Hope this answers it once and for all. HS2 is not subject to the Barnett formula.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-24648153

There is confusion about whether Wales has received extra funding as a result of the High Speed 2 rail project.

Finance Minister Jane Hutt has told AMs there was a £35m budget increase coming in 2015-16 as a result of £832m UK expenditure on HS2.

But the UK Treasury has categorically denied this, saying that HS2 spending is not being passed on.

 

[Chris125]

I see the new tunnels on the approach to Birmingham and under the NNML have been confirmed following conusultation - press releases
here and here. Apparently the tunnel under Northolt will knock 15 months off the construction programme, so it will be interesting to see if this can be translated into an earlier opening for phase 1.

Chris

 

[southern442]

I see the new tunnels on the approach to Birmingham and under the NNML have been confirmed following conusultation - press releases
here and here. Apparently the tunnel under Northolt will knock 15 months off the construction programme, so it will be interesting to see if this can be translated into an earlier opening for phase 1.

Chris

Probably a naive question but why not run the trains along the NNML and start the portals at the end of it? The only reasons I can thin of are track upgrading and noise.

 

[HSTEd]

Probably a naive question but why not run the trains along the NNML and start the portals at the end of it? The only reasons I can thin of are track upgrading and noise.

The bridge replacements necessary to gauge clear the NNML turned out to be horrendously disruptive, and thus expensive once disruption compensation had been paid out.

 

[southern442]

The bridge replacements necessary to gauge clear the NNML turned out to be horrendously disruptive, and thus expensive once disruption compensation had been paid out.

Oh. It would have been nice to give the NNML a new set of trains.

 

[deltic]

I see the new tunnels on the approach to Birmingham and under the NNML have been confirmed following conusultation - press releases
here and here. Apparently the tunnel under Northolt will knock 15 months off the construction programme, so it will be interesting to see if this can be translated into an earlier opening for phase 1.

Chris

No - the works at Euston are probably the limiting factor in determining timescales

 

[Nym]

No - the works at Euston are probably the limiting factor in determining timescales

Indeed, and there is likely to be a hell of a lot of work to be done at Euston, above and below ground. (Not even including Crossrail 2)

 

[Gareth Marston]

Hope this answers it once and for all. HS2 is not subject to the Barnett formula.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-24648153

Stop HS2 crowd are going mental not realising the extra welsh money is actually a consequential of increased English road spending.

 

[HSTEd]

The Euston Cross space undergroundw ould be far better reserved for a future Great Western High Speed line.

Eastern and North Eastern lines can run out of a reconstructed KGX, but Great Western will need somewhere closer than Paddington for maximum connectivity, unless you want to put a huge load on Crossrail and the Subsurface lines along the Paddington-King's Cross corridor.

 

[edwin_m]

The Euston Cross space undergroundw ould be far better reserved for a future Great Western High Speed line.

Eastern and North Eastern lines can run out of a reconstructed KGX, but Great Western will need somewhere closer than Paddington for maximum connectivity, unless you want to put a huge load on Crossrail and the Subsurface lines along the Paddington-King's Cross corridor.

Now that's an excellent suggestion!