High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[Ironside]

Maximum possible turnout speeds are 230kph, so you will loose capacity no matter how long the loops are with an extra station stop.

That is a very important and facinating statement. Could you elaborate ie can a train move over points remaining on the main line at a faster speed but trains turning off are limited to 230kph?

How did this 230kph limit come about? Could it ever be improved upon or is it as concrete as the speed limit for non in cab signalling.

 

[Martin222002]

The Birmingham Interchange station will be near the junction of the Birmingham branch and the main line, and this means that although not all trains will stop, by careful timetabling it can be accommodated without loss of capacity on the main line to/from London.

The section of the proposed route from just south of the Birmingham Interchange station increases from 2 to 4 tracks. These 4 tracks then continue to the delta junction to Birmingham where it then increase 6 tracks, with it slowly reverting back to 2 tacks north of the eastern branch, towards Leeds.

It is only this complicated track layout that I guess will allow trains to stop at Birmingham Interchange while arrive from and depart to there relevant destinations without loosing the overall capacity of 18tph.

 

[MarkyT]

It is naive to believe that rural areas are all well off. Rural isolation is still big issue and is a significant cause of the high number of 'neets'.

Of those rural dwellers, the ones prepared to (presumably) shell out a premium for a super-fast London commute will not be the worst off.

 

[YorkshireBear]

To both.

It is believed above this speed the mechanics will become very difficult and possibly unsafe. Source is actually a presentation by HS2 limited to NEREF a year ago by some one of their top gizas. I do not fully understand this as it is not my expertise.

And this would only be on the 'turn' of the turnout the straight would still be full speed.

 

[HSTEd]

Maximum possible turnout speeds are 230kph, so you will loose capacity no matter how long the loops are with an extra station stop.

Well this is not actually true.

Otherwise how would the turnouts at Birmingham Delta handle 18 trains per hour

But having stations that have only some trains calling will drastically cut capacity.

 

[YorkshireBear]

That is a very important and facinating statement. Could you elaborate ie can a train move over points remaining on the main line at a faster speed but trains turning off are limited to 230kph?

How did this 230kph limit come about? Could it ever be improved upon or is it as concrete as the speed limit for non in cab signalling.

Your ie is correct.

I think it is the mechnical limit... But like i say i am a civil engineer it isn't really my expertise. Someone on here may be able to explain or theorise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Well this is not actually true.

Otherwise how would the turnouts at Birmingham Delta handle 18 trains per hour

But having stations that have only some trains calling will drastically cut capacity.

The one carrying on North will be at full speed those going into Birmingham down to 230...

Note this speed is assumed maximum for HS2 for the reasons i gave. They cannot see it raising much above this if any.

 

[HSTEd]

The one carrying on North will be at full speed those going into Birmingham down to 230...

Note this speed is assumed maximum for HS2 for the reasons i gave. They cannot see it raising much above this if any.

I was questioning that it must inevitably reduce line capacity, not that it was limited.

 

[MarkyT]

. . . can a train move over points remaining on the main line at a faster speed . . . Could it ever be improved upon or is it as concrete as the speed limit for non in cab signalling.

The 'straight route' through the turnout is not speed limited, it's the 'turnout route' only. If the switch is a Y form with both legs curved then a restriction may apply to both. As to whether turnout speed could be improved that's difficult as the size, weight and complexity of the moving 'frog' crossing component would increase as the crossing angle reduces for a higher speed divergence. The length of the moving switches themselves would also increase with more motor drives and limit switch detection feedback sensors required, and that could affect reliability. The original very fast turnouts from the GWML fast lines to the Heathrow airport branch were replaced with simpler, slower examples a few years ago to improve reliability.

 

[YorkshireBear]

I was questioning that it must inevitably reduce line capacity, not that it was limited.

Ah sorry :P misunderstood.

 

[edwin_m]

The 18TPH capacity allows for some trains to slow to 230km/h to take the turnouts into the Birmingham Interchange station or the branch towards Birmingham. As mentioned the turnouts are a long way from the stations so that trains can take the points at 230km/h and still stop at the station.

230km/h is used because it is the fastest turnout currently available.

However even with 230km/h turnouts and long loops, an intermediate station in Buckinghamshire would reduce capacity more than one in Birmingham. This is because when the train comes off the main line to slow down for the station it leaves an empty path on the main line. When it accelerates and rejoins the main line it needs another, later, empty path to drop into. Hence unless the stopping trains are frequent enough that a departing one fills the path left by the next arrival, each train stopping will need two paths.

 

[tbtc]

There are valid reasons to criticise HS2, some of which I agree with, others of which I can at least sympathise with.

But today's Guardian article ("revenge of the trainspotters") is just embarassing in its attempt to find something to complain about:

the world could, in around 50 years' time, be seeing something completely new: middle-aged women celebrities with model railways in their lofts

a Canadian academic, Shauna Wilton, drew attention to the dark side of the Thomas videos, with their relentless affirmation of conservative values and civic obedience to a fixed hierarchy. Certainly, the story of Henry, the degenerate engine bricked up in a dark tunnel as a punishment for his vanity and idleness, is one I would prefer to forget. "Eventually," Wilton argued, "these children will attain full political citizenship and the opinions and world outlook they develop now

would you find a female model-railway enthusiast to compare with prominent task force member and former record producer Pete Waterman, proprietor of a 4,000-yard model railway track that recreates 1950s Leamington Spa?

In addition to professional qualifications in train maintenance and his early trainspotting, Waterman brings to the £42bn HS2 project his experience of building, from scratch, a
complex model system that reportedly needs "12 men" to operate at capacity

Yesterday's Thomas acolytes have become today's campaigners for a national train set, featuring actual grass and trashed woodland, real-life compulsorily purchased homes and proper bypassed cities, even grumpy controllers who call people "prats" and accuse wayward passengers of stupidity. The public deserves better, by way of arguments for HS2, than the revenge of the train spotters

It reads like a whiny spoof of a Guardian article in Private Eye, rather than something serious that people would pay money for at a newsagents. Is this the best that the "anti" campaign can do?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/02/hs2-big-boys-toy

 

[jon0844]

I hope that IS the best they can do, as it makes things a lot easier for everyone else to just get it all approved and built.

 

[WatcherZero]

Also just noticed something:

On the HS2 Website:

The Edinburgh travel time is listed as 218 minutes, calling at OOC and Carstairs only.
The Newcastle travel time is listed as 138 minutes, calling at OOC and York only.

From the current timetable the Newcastle-Edinburgh travel time is 88-90 minutes, which would put a Edinburgh via Newcastle journey time at something like 230 minutes.

So going via the 'shorter' and 'more direct' WCML saves 12 minutes on a journey of 3.5-4 hours.

Which means those Newcastle paths are potentially very useful in the future....

Because your travelling further on high speed lines despite the route being geographically longer. Its a benefit that would be eroded if the Government extends the western branch beyond Wigan, or NR improves line speed on the classic line.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Is it?

Excellent. Never noticed that in the spec before. Maybe they'll pay some tax, once they've moved to Yorkshire?

There are a few other aims of HS2, mainly freeing up capacity on current lines (which is currently taken up by non-stop/fast trains, that take a disproportionate amount of line capacity)

The reason that Northern Metropolitan councils are firmly behind the HS2 project is that they believe the improved journey times to London will have economic benefits. I would argue that improved capacity is of little interest to them.

With reference to how much corporation tax Google pay, moving to Yorkshire or indeed anywhere else is unlikely to have any influence. However, it might encourage the North's brightest young things to stay put and not continue to migrate to London. Surely this can only be a good thing? Given that you live in Sheffield you tell me!

 

[HSTEd]

Because your travelling further on high speed lines despite the route being geographically longer. Its a benefit that would be eroded if the Government extends the western branch beyond Wigan, or NR improves line speed on the classic line.

And a benefit that would be increased if a line to Newcastle was constructed considering its low projected pricetag thanks to its short length and so on.

But even so, perhaps extending the Newcastle classic sets to Edinburgh would not be a ridiculous waste of time, and it would also allow for later dispersal of paths in the futher developing system.

 

[The Ham]

There are valid reasons to criticise HS2, some of which I agree with, others of which I can at least sympathise with.

But today's Guardian article ("revenge of the trainspotters") is just embarassing in its attempt to find something to complain about:

It reads like a whiny spoof of a Guardian article in Private Eye, rather than something serious that people would pay money for at a newsagents. Is this the best that the "anti" campaign can do?

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/02/hs2-big-boys-toy

They may well grow up to want to have a better railway system, however they are also likely to grow up and use trains, meaning that we don't have to build miles and miles of new motorways so they can sit in their cars. Short of taxing eveyone who travels more than a set distance in a set timeframe the most efficant use of land sapce is for modes of transport which do carry high volumns of people in a confined space.

To put in perspective, a single carriageway road with no junctions and a constant flow of traffic can carry about 1,500 cars an hour. Even if you were to have car ocupancy rates of 3 people per car, that is 4,500 people, if you have 100 buses (which then reduces the number of cars to 1,300) with each bus carrying 40 people that then ups the road's capacity to 8,000 each way. Whilst a conventional railway would need 16 trains per hour carrying 500 people to have the same capacity. Whilst HS2 could carry the same number of people in just 10 trains with each train carrying 800 people.

However such a road is almost impossible to produce, as ignorring all the other possibilities just adding 25 lorries to it would reduce the number of cars by 50 and therefore the number of people using it by 150. Likewise if just 10% of the cars only had one person with all the rest still having an average of 3 people, that would reduce the capacity of that road by 250 people. In comparrison railways carrying 8,000 people in an hour are farily easy to achive.

Also, regardless of what some may think there is a need for some form of governance where some are in charge and there are punishments are handed out for wrong doing and it is a good thing that children are taught this. Those who disagree should try and imagine living with no rules (as if no punishments can be handed out then there is no point in rules), even if noting else the road would be unusable.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Go on the anti forums if you want to see some real la la land thinking. Every story about HS2 has to be negative, there's a woeful ignorance of the capacity and disruption facts. There's people who even post that no one uses trains.

Stop HS2 seem to be in shock that the pathing bill went through some of them genuinely thought that somehow they'd won the battle. Which is completely different to a couple of media sources sympathetically running any old nonsense that's said about HS2.

Andrew Gilligans latest rant in the Sunday Telegraph try's to spin the line that because of the length of time that HS2 will take to build existing lines could be upgraded quicker and he uses the example of The ECML electrification, but of course putting up the wires on existing tracks is lot easier than adding extra tracks to existing lines and new junctions. HS2 of course takes so long to build as it was planned using the existing Crossrail budget amount per year.

 

[tbtc]

With reference to how much corporation tax Google pay, moving to Yorkshire or indeed anywhere else is unlikely to have any influence. However, it might encourage the North's brightest young things to stay put and not continue to migrate to London. Surely this can only be a good thing? Given that you live in Sheffield you tell me!

Every year we see large numbers of bright young graduates, educated at large universities in northern England (Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield etc) move down to London because "thats where the jobs are".

Build a new railway that puts central London roughly an hour away and commuting from "the north" to London becomes realistic (the savings on renting a house potentially being greater than the added travel costs).

 

[YorkshireBear]

Every year we see large numbers of bright young graduates, educated at large universities in northern England (Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield etc) move down to London because "thats where the jobs are".

Build a new railway that puts central London roughly an hour away and commuting from "the north" to London becomes realistic (the savings on renting a house potentially being greater than the added travel costs).

I am currently going through the motions of apply for graduate civil engineering jobs, a lot of people are looking down south for jobs as that is where they are proving your point.

Has to be said this graduate is staying up north! As a northerner it is my responsibility to cross the border to the dark south.

 

[meridian2]

Go on the anti forums if you want to see some real la la land thinking. Every story about HS2 has to be negative, there's a woeful ignorance of the capacity and disruption facts. There's people who even post that no one uses trains.

What do you expect when the whole thing has been misrepresented? As for 'la la land thinking', provide substantial evidence of this otherwise quit mud slinging. :roll:

Stop HS2 seem to be in shock that the pathing bill went through some of them genuinely thought that somehow they'd won the battle. Which is completely different to a couple of media sources sympathetically running any old nonsense that's said about HS2.

That's a bit premature. There is still much deliberating in the House of Lords and a great deal of consultation before the project is even built.

Andrew Gilligans latest rant in the Sunday Telegraph try's to spin the line that because of the length of time that HS2 will take to build existing lines could be upgraded quicker and he uses the example of The ECML electrification, but of course putting up the wires on existing tracks is lot easier than adding extra tracks to existing lines and new junctions. HS2 of course takes so long to build as it was planned using the existing Crossrail budget amount per year.

They can be upgraded quicker! The WCRM has enabled trains to run to a greater frequency and that only took 5 years to build compared to the 5 years of pointless deliberating before HS2 is even built! That has nullified one of the first pro-points of HS2 and proven Gilligan's argument.

A lot of the pro-HS2 arguments fail to take into account the lack of demand and finances. There is simply no demand for such a project, only by businesses and corporations that would gain from running a greater frequency of freight trains on the pre-existing main lines. As for Joe Public, name one layman who would gain from getting from A to B quicker who wouldn't opt for the cheaper option of a domestic flight?

 

[Grumpy]

I am currently going through the motions of apply for graduate civil engineering jobs, a lot of people are looking down south for jobs as that is where they are proving your point.

Why are the jobs in the South? Could it possibly be as a result of most public sector investment (and associated private sector spin off) being skewed towards the South. In recent years we have had the Dome, Heathrow terminals, London Olympics work, HS1 (and before that Waterloo international), London Overground, Crossrail etc. Government funding for public transport in London is ten times what it is in Northern England. It's a self fulfilling prophesy-they spend the money in London, that requires them to suck in resources, there's lots of money floating around as a result which shows the South's doing better and they then use this to justify further investment.

Take HS2. it's being sold as a National project with a new line running from London to Leeds/Manchester. So where is all the planning resource based?
Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham?

Personally I think London's a dump (some pretty buildings in the centre perhaps). The Hotels reflect the city-overpriced, dirty and staffed by foreigners many of whom don't seem to be able to speak English. The trains from Leeds to London at popular times are ridiculously overpriced-it's cheaper to fly to Dusseldorf and stay overnight for a meeting than day trip London. The hotels are cleaner, the food and beer are better, and you meet more English speakers.

 

[L&Y Robert]

I see there are 374 pages of this thread and this query may well have been answered already. I have the idea, gathered from where I know not, that HS2 is to be a self-contained railway. That is to say its trains will go from this end to that end and back again but to nowhere else. When I was in Italy some years ago I saw that the high speed line coming into Florence merged with the 'ordinary' railway and so the high speed trains arrived at the 'ordinary' station. Does HS2 do that? Might the high speed train proposed here decant onto the ordinary railway to arrive at, say, Halifax? or Rochdale? If not, why not? But if, after all HS2 is self-contained, can we build it to different track and loading gauges - seven foot nought and a quarter, and channel tunnel shuttle loading gauge for example.

 

[tbtc]

Why are the jobs in the South? Could it possibly be as a result of most public sector investment (and associated private sector spin off) being skewed towards the South. In recent years we have had the Dome

In the grand scheme of things, the Dome was never about creating a large number of jobs

it's cheaper to fly to Dusseldorf and stay overnight for a meeting than day trip London. The hotels are cleaner, the food and beer are better, and you meet more English speakers

What point are you trying to make here?

I see there are 374 pages of this thread and this query may well have been answered already. I have the idea, gathered from where I know not, that HS2 is to be a self-contained railway. That is to say its trains will go from this end to that end and back again but to nowhere else. When I was in Italy some years ago I saw that the high speed line coming into Florence merged with the 'ordinary' railway and so the high speed trains arrived at the 'ordinary' station. Does HS2 do that? Might the high speed train proposed here decant onto the ordinary railway to arrive at, say, Halifax? or Rochdale? If not, why not? But if, after all HS2 is self-contained, can we build it to different track and loading gauges - seven foot nought and a quarter, and channel tunnel shuttle loading gauge for example.

The plan is mainly for trains to be kept on dedicated HS2 lines, but with some "classic compatible" trains extending to places like Newcastle and Liverpool on "conventional" lines.

Tricky to strike a balance between a simple operation (that would allow nice wide trains) and serving everywhere (can you imagine the complaints if LIverpool didn't see any services via HS2?).

There's scope to build HS2 beyond Leeds/ Wigan so that places like Newcastle/ Liverpool/ Glasgow/ Edinburgh will be served on HS2 all the way, but can only build so much at a time.

 

[Geezertronic]

I see there are 374 pages of this thread and this query may well have been answered already. I have the idea, gathered from where I know not, that HS2 is to be a self-contained railway. That is to say its trains will go from this end to that end and back again but to nowhere else. When I was in Italy some years ago I saw that the high speed line coming into Florence merged with the 'ordinary' railway and so the high speed trains arrived at the 'ordinary' station. Does HS2 do that? Might the high speed train proposed here decant onto the ordinary railway to arrive at, say, Halifax? or Rochdale? If not, why not? But if, after all HS2 is self-contained, can we build it to different track and loading gauges - seven foot nought and a quarter, and channel tunnel shuttle loading gauge for example.

HS2 will (eventually) have captive sets but will also have classic compatible sets capable of the higher HS2 speeds but can also run on other lines (such as the WCML, ECML, MML etc...) to allow services to carry on beyond HS2.

From Day One of HS2 Phase 1 opening, I would expect the 390 Pendolinos to be able to use HS2 for northern destinations and at their 140mph maximum speed however that has yet to be confirmed as far as I am aware

 

[Grumpy]

HS2 will (eventually) have captive sets but will also have classic compatible sets capable of the higher HS2 speeds but can also run on other lines (such as the WCML, ECML, MML etc...) to allow services to carry on beyond HS2.

From Day One of HS2 Phase 1 opening, I would expect the 390 Pendolinos to be able to use HS2 for northern destinations and at their 140mph maximum speed however that has yet to be confirmed as far as I am aware

If the Classic Compatibles can do everything the Captives can do, what is the point of buying the Captives, which offer less flexibility?

By the time HS2 opens the Class 390's (and indeed Voyagers/ Meridians etc) will be reaching the age where replacement will be under consideration. Perhaps we should consider a big order for a fleet of Classic compatibles that that can replace the lot.

 

[The Planner]

You won't get Pendos on HS2 phase 1, I would bet substantial amounts of cash on that.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

When I was in Italy some years ago I saw that the high speed line coming into Florence merged with the 'ordinary' railway and so the high speed trains arrived at the 'ordinary' station. Does HS2 do that? Might the high speed train proposed here decant onto the ordinary railway to arrive at, say, Halifax? or Rochdale?

Continental HS trains are essentially "go anywhere" because they have a common (large) loading gauge.
HS2 will be the same gauge, so it will be able to accept standard Eurotrains like TGV/ICE/AVE/Eurostar etc.
That means we can buy trains off the shelf and not have to buy expensive dedicated stuff re-engineered to fit our loading gauge, like IEP, Pendolino etc.
But these trains won't be able to run off the HS2 line (except to HS1 assuming a link is built).
So our classic trains, or new ones to our dimensions, will be needed to run off HS2 to Scotland, Newcastle, Liverpool etc.
This will be a good proportion of the overall HS2 services.

I don't think Rochdale or Halifax is on anybody's list to get HS2 services.
That needs L&Y electrification first, which is another story.
But broadly, any AC electrified destination could see HS2 services.
Once the Leeds/York arm is ready, we could see Bristol-Newcastle services via the northern section of HS2, for instance (assuming the XC wires are up by then).
This is one way, ignored by the press, for places like South Wales and Devon to benefit from HS2.

 

[HowardGWR]

HS2 will (eventually) have captive sets but will also have classic compatible sets capable of the higher HS2 speeds but can also run on other lines (such as the WCML, ECML, MML etc...) to allow services to carry on beyond HS2.

From Day One of HS2 Phase 1 opening, I would expect the 390 Pendolinos to be able to use HS2 for northern destinations and at their 140 mph maximum speed however that has yet to be confirmed as far as I am aware

L and Y Robert's query initially astonished me, but it has led to some interesting replies, thanks anyway. It seems to me that politically, this may be the most important feature of HS2 to gain widespread support. If nearly every city (yes, including Bristol and Cardiff, Cambridge (and Stansted), Southampton and Brighton (and so on) could gain something, using CC sets, this would be a big selling point, in fact I regard it as a no-brainer. Brum, east of New St and Curzon St and also Calvert North to East (for E-W) seem well worth considering building in. Can posters think of others?

 

[Wavertreelad]

Every year we see large numbers of bright young graduates, educated at large universities in northern England (Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield etc) move down to London because "thats where the jobs are".

Build a new railway that puts central London roughly an hour away and commuting from "the north" to London becomes realistic (the savings on renting a house potentially being greater than the added travel costs).

If ever there was any doubt that HS2 needs to be built surely this is article demonstrates it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...gh-cheaper-live-BARCELONA-commute-heres-.html

Yes it is extreme, but think what it could be like in 20 years time unless the jobs are more evenly spread around our country?

 

[tbtc]

If the Classic Compatibles can do everything the Captives can do, what is the point of buying the Captives, which offer less flexibility?

AIUI the Captive trains are going to be (roughly) 400m long (which HS2 infrastructure will be built to cope with), whilst the Classic Compatible ones will be (roughly) 200m long - so equivalent to a 10x20m/ 9x23m train, which is roughly as long as most current stations could cope with.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

L and Y Robert's query initially astonished me, but it has led to some interesting replies, thanks anyway. It seems to me that politically, this may be the most important feature of HS2 to gain widespread support. If nearly every city (yes, including Bristol and Cardiff, Cambridge (and Stansted), Southampton and Brighton (and so on) could gain something, using CC sets, this would be a big selling point, in fact I regard it as a no-brainer. Brum, east of New St and Curzon St and also Calvert North to East (for E-W) seem well worth considering building in. Can posters think of others?

Its going to take us twenty years "just" to build HS2 from London to Wigan/ Leeds. Including Southampton / Cardiff etc would take a lot longer.

There's scope for further High Speed lines, but we are spending a lot of money on upgrading the current lines to provide faster services - e.g. GWML electrification from London to Bristol/ Cardiff, twelve coach 700s on the London - Brighton line. HS2 won't benefit every corner of the UK, but then neither will all of these other schemes.