HS2 4 Track

[Nym]

Now, in a conversation with someone this just came up, so I wonder what you all think on here.

14tph has been published as the limit for the 2 track sections of HS2 with 16tph a possibility.

Now 14tph goes very quickly when you take both upper branches into account, so...

Euston to Old Oak Common as 2 track, as it will have a lower line speed, capacity will be higher, in the order of about 20 to 24tph.

So:

Euston - Old Oak 2 track
(Old Oak - HS1 as proposed (3tph capacity))
Old Oak - Amersham 4 track, there would be the facility built around this station for a the Heathrow Branch and a branch to Didcot
Amersham - Birmingham Delta Junction 4 track

2 track on the three branches from Birmingham

Between Amersham HS Station and Birmgham International, stations at:

Alysbury (North and/or South) Large car park provision with links to the A41 or A4010

Brackley, off the A43, same, large car park...

Similar arrangments at Banbury, and the A46 round Lemington Spa

All platforms on loops from all lines, all lines bi-directional, favouring paired by direction.

Now, this may seem like a bit of a waste of stations, but, Javelin style services running on this route, but not using anything like 395s, I'm talking about using GC Guage stock geared to upto 200mph, running 2/3tph peak and 1/2tph off peak services between Birmingham / Birmingham Intl. and Euston.

Would keep the NIMBYs happyer, would also provide some redundancy in the line.

And with clever timetabling, it would also allow anything upto 30 tph high speed services between London and the North

24tph between old oak and Euston
3tph between old oak and St Panc / Stratford
upto 24tph between Heathrow and Amersham

Now, as nothing would stop, and would be of similar performance of accelaration between Amersham and Old Oak, this could theoratically fit 32tph.

And with proper timetabling and use of the platform loops, 20tph fast services could be timetabled between Amersham and Birmingham Intl, not to mention additional potential services between Didcot and Euston / Heathrow

Possible service Pattern:

With 6tph slow on the loops, it will be possible to path 6tph fast 'behind' it that would overtake in some or each of the platform loops while the 'slow' is stopped. Slow paths could also be removed with fasts in it's place, so working on an operations 'slow lines' capacity of 12tph, and 14tph on the fasts.

'Slow' Lines 'Slows':
Euston - Birmingham Slow 3tph
Ebbsfleet - Birmingham Slow 1tph (Change at Old Oak for Euston)

'Fast' lines
Euston - Manchester 3tph
Euston - Birmingham Fast 3tph
Euston - Leeds 2tph
Euston - Doncaster - York 2tph
Euston - Liverpool 2tph
Euston - Preston 2tph

The fast lines would provide the 'core' services that don't stop south of Birmingham International, most not even stopping at Birmingham International, 1tph per route.

Now on the slow lines, 6tph slow and 6tph fast, but as all run fast from Amersham, there is space for an additional 2tph here into Euston, and as many as needed into Heathrow.

So, on the slow lines:
Manchester - Heathrow 1tph
Birmingham - Heathrow 1tph
Leeds - Heathrow 1tph
Newcastle - York - Doncaster - Heathrow 1tph

This leaves 4tph spare paths between Birmingham and Amersham, and 6tph spare paths between Amersham and Old Oak, so...

Manchester/Birmingham - Tunnel 1tph pathed
Leeds/York - Tunnel 1tph pathed

This would introduce some flexability as to the stock used aswell, as 373s would be able to run this route, on the slows, as the're not as fast as the linespeed.

All these services would use (in terms of paths)

Birmingham - Amersham: 14/14F 10/12S
Amersham - Old Oak: 14/14F 6/14S
Old Oak - Euston: 17/24

So, theres a spare 7 paths available into Euston and 8 into Old Oak (I'm sure one more might be squesed into Eutson)

Now when HSx comes to Bristol and Cardiff, no need for more infersturcture in London, just join the dots at Amersham and theres paths for 6tph with spares still available from Didcot, and plenty of space to get to Heathrow, and the tunnel if interworked with the HS2 services.

That would mean, with HS2 and HS(West Country) a possible service pattern of:

Assuming HS Guage to Bristol TM, Manchester and Leeds, stock is indicated as CC or GC

Euston -
Manchester 3tph GC
Birmingham 3tph fast 3tph slow GC
Leeds 2tph GC
Newcastle (Edinburgh) via Doncaster 2tph CC
Liverpool 2tph CC
Preston (Glasgow) 2tph CC
Cardiff 2tph CC
Bristol TM 4tph (2tph extended to West Country) GC & CC
1tph path spare

Channel Tunnel -
Birmingham Intl up to 2tph
West Country upto 2tph

Heathrow -
Manchester 1tph GC
Birmingham 1tph GC
Leeds 1tph GC
Newcastle 1tph CC
Bristol 1tph GC
Cardiff 1tph CC

Ebbsfleet -
Birmingham 1tph


PS: The link to Didcot could be built at the same time as the Rugley - Manchester section, so that the Classic Compatable stock is displaced to be used on Bristol - Didcot - Euston, then further displaced when stock becomes available, due to GC Guage all the way to TM.

PPS: I've invisaged the Leeds/East Midlands branch as a dedicated link into Leeds with a branch to the ECML at Doncaster before the line continues to Leeds, where it would terminate, getting through Leeds is just too difficult IMO, and if HSx from Liverpool St area to Leeds / Newcastle via Cambridge and PBO comes to fruition, it would link in with that at this junction.

 

[j0hn0]

I recently filled in dfts questionnaire on hs2 and the points I made were almost exactly what you propose, but not as detailed

I think 4 track between bhx and ooc is vital, as is a 2 track link to hs1 and intermediate stations in banbury and amersham.

 

[Nym]

Oh good, what I wrote was understandable...

 

[deltic]

Having seen the number of services that are being proposed on HS2 there is certainly a need for quadruple tracking or extensive use of units splitting to serve destinations in the north.

 

[Nick W]

A guy up in Network Rail who was part of the team responsible in commissioning their own report mentioned the need for two routes out of London by some point in the future (may have been 2050) for HS2. I later asked him if, since Leicester is north of Rugby, if it would be sensible to build wide enough earthworks for later 4-tracking or if he planned to serve separate stations on different lines (eg Luton and Millton Keynes). His reply was basically that planning it to be built that wide would make it difficult to get planning permission, but that he wasn't keen on serving anywhere south of Birmingham/Leicester.

So expect two high speed lines out of London heading North, within about 10-20 miles of each other, running parallel to a point near rugby in our lifetimes!

 

[WatcherZero]

I put in the consultation there should be at least passive provision for 4 track, but if they did do it later it would have to be a second alignment yes.

 

[dalmahoyhill]

hmm i am trying to remember where i saw it, in one of the early consultation docs for HS2 from Adonis time as Transport Sec it had a mention of 4 tracking squirrelled away. it said that a land corridor for future 4 tracking should be acquired and protected against development. it said structures should be designed with future expansion in mind.

the head of SNCF made a similar comment saying if they had know how successful HSR had been they would have protected paris lyon for 4 tracking.

my thoughts on this was that the proposed single line tunnel from old oak common to HS1 should be built for double track, with the alignment into Euston arranged that the tunnel could be future adapted with a junction to take another additional two tracks in euston.

 

[RichW1]

Does seem gutting that so many motorways got permission for such width, but propose the railways and they can't get planning permission! Poor forsight. We all know 2 tracks won't be anything like enough capacity. This will be HS2's downfall I feel. It's so sad too because for the width of a motorway we could achieve something near biblical proportions in terms of our transport needs but instead, we'll be back to the drawing board very shortly having only partially alleviated the traffic we needed to from conventional rail. It'll be a compromise. Not good in a world in which compromise on such an issue as small as a few extra metres width on a railway is not an option.

It is because of issues like this the Far East will win out economically. While we compromise and sit on our hands deciding, they will have built several railways in the same period. Politicians should be aware of history. It's all happened before and the winner in jobs and economic prosperity has never been the compromiser and over-debater.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Does seem gutting that so many motorways got permission for such width, but propose the railways and they can't get planning permission! Poor forsight. We all know 2 tracks won't be anything like enough capacity. This will be HS2's downfall I feel. It's so sad too because for the width of a motorway we could achieve something near biblical proportions in terms of our transport needs but instead, we'll be back to the drawing board very shortly having only partially alleviated the traffic we needed to from conventional rail. It'll be a compromise. Not good in a world in which compromise on such an issue as small as a few extra metres width on a railway is not an option.

It is because of issues like this the Far East will win out economically. While we compromise and sit on our hands deciding, they will have built several railways in the same period. Politicians should be aware of history. It's all happened before and the winner in jobs and economic prosperity has never been the compromiser and over-debater.

You have to remember that we live in a densely populated country (certainly in England) so its inevitable that there will opposition to new transport links. In recent years even the mighty SNCF (who I greatly admire) have faced mounting opposition to new TGV lines. As for the Chinese, lets face it the Government does what it damn well pleases and god help you if you get in the way. Is that what you really want in the UK?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Oh good, what I wrote was understandable...

You are doing well with your threads on HS2 this weekend. Your other thread about HS2 routes into Manchester has suddenly had a new lease of life.

You always write a good posting....it needs a quiet moment to absorb all the information that you go to great trouble to collate, then prepare in a posting.

 

[Jonny]

The trouble is that the plan is for HS2 to cover the West Coast, Midland and East Coast mainlines. Let's just say that
1.) Birmingham is a massive detour for many East Coast / Midland Mainline journeys.
2.) There's no way all that is going to fit down a single line. We need to get going on HS3 as well!

 

[Invincibles]

You have to remember that we live in a densely populated country (certainly in England) so its inevitable that there will opposition to new transport links. In recent years even the mighty SNCF (who I greatly admire) have faced mounting opposition to new TGV lines. As for the Chinese, lets face it the Government does what it damn well pleases and god help you if you get in the way. Is that what you really want in the UK?

If only we had the foresight to subscribe to the motherland idea then any house is just a temporary occupation that can be changed at will to a railway.

However, the Chinese do seem to like building two track lines. I think that is just so they can build another one a few years later rather than anything else.

 

[Nym]

Lest not forget that finding a viable route into London is damn near impossible.

Asside from HS2 and HS1s routes, I can see another one or two available, the next steps after HS2 will more than likely be (In no particular order, numbers added for convenience)

HS3: London - Cambridge - PBO - Doncaster - York - NCL - Edin
HS4: London - M4 Corridor - Bristol & Cardiff
HS5: Birmingham - Bristol

Now, if what I've said above is implemented, HS4 could run into Euston with HS2, HS3 would run into the Liverpool St area, theres some land round Shordich High St IIRC. HS5 would take over the Camp Hill route and need a reversal at Curzon St.

The order I think they should be built (And opened) in:

Old Oak Common - St Pancras (Don't ask, but if the rest of HS2 opens first, then St Pancras can be used for preview services etc.)

Euston will be started at the beginning of the project, but will take a long time.

Next up Alesbury - Old Oak, preview services begin into St Pancras.

Euston - Birmingham Delta - (Tamworth Connection, Birmingham CZS, Rugley Connection)

HS2a is now complete, services can begin on the full route.

Rugley - Manchester Intl Delta - (Manchester Mayfeild, Chat Moss Connection)
and
Didcot Connection

Manchester - London & Birmingham services are now moved over to GC Stock and services begin to Bristol and Cardiff using displaced CC Stock.

Birmingham Delta - Doncaster HS Connection
South Yorkshire Junction - Leeds Central
Heathrow Connection

London & Birmingham - Leeds is now GC Stock, faster services through Doncaster with CC Stock running on to Newcastle

Now depending on demand, either HS3 or 4 next.

HS3 would run roughly on the route as above, again with some 4 track, up to Peterburough.

HS4 would continue from Didcot to Bristol (in the car park at Temple Meads) CC Stock continuing onwards on some services, CC Stock through the Severn Tunnel to Swansea, GC Stock to Bristol.

 

[LE Greys]

We really should take lessons from France, especially LGV Sud-Est. This pretty much reached capacity twenty years after opening, and still bypasses Dijon. I don't know how they are planning to shoe-horn the Rhin-Rhône services onto it, but it will probably need quadrupling from Montbard Junction to Paris, and maybe Montbard Junction-Lyon as well. Presumably, they never imagined such huge passenger growth on the route. We have, and we should do something about it.

 

[RichW1]

Now, if what I've said above is implemented, HS4 could run into Euston with HS2, HS3 would run into the Liverpool St area, theres some land round Shordich High St IIRC

Not anymore! The land around Shoreditch is going to be skyscrapers and the developers already have a firm grip. Also, given the number of platforms suggested for the re-modelled Euston, I'm not sure it'll cope with all the Great Western traffic too.

We really should take lessons from France, especially LGV Sud-Est. This pretty much reached capacity twenty years after opening, and still bypasses Dijon. I don't know how they are planning to shoe-horn the Rhin-Rhône services onto it, but it will probably need quadrupling from Montbard Junction to Paris, and maybe Montbard Junction-Lyon as well. Presumably, they never imagined such huge passenger growth on the route. We have, and we should do something about it.

Totally agree - we should be future proofing because we have evidence of what happens already as cited!

 

[LE Greys]

Not anymore! The land around Shoreditch is going to be skyscrapers and the developers already have a firm grip. Also, given the number of platforms suggested for the re-modelled Euston, I'm not sure it'll cope with all the Great Western traffic too.

I reckon that the likely junction between HS2 and a potential HS3 is Stratford, accessed along the Central Line alignment (probably underneath). It will of course be a triangle, so Stansted-Stratford-Ebbsfleet will be possible without reversal. This might mean diverting Javelin services up from the current route and into Liverpool Street (if there is capacity) or building extra platforms underneath St Pancras at street level, or even Thameslink level. Old Oak is likely to turn into a "scissors" junction, with HS4 services continuing to Paddington except for any going to the Continent, while HEx or its equivalent would run into Euston on the WCML (which will be a lot less busy) by connecting to the current fasts somewhere near Kensal Green.

 

[Waverley125]

personally instead of necessarily 4-tracking to Birmingham I'd rather see a route 'cutting the corner' between Sheffield & Amersham. This would take all Leeds, Newcastle & Edinburgh traffic off the line from thereon-so at least 4 fasts per hour.

I also don't think it's a stupid idea to run long-distance services that do actually call places, i.e.

London-Sheffield-Leeds-Newcastle-Edinburgh

following on from this i agree we really need to look at other routes, in addition to those mentioned, Leeds-Liverpool via Manchester being a biggy.

Also, in scotland

Glasgow-Edinbugh
Edinburgh-Dundee-Aberdeen
Glasgow-Dundee

and, further afield

Carlisle-Belfast (spur from Glasgow HS line)

Holyhead-Dublin