HS2 and Liverpool

[john prytherch]

Could a new Liverpool link leave from the junction with HS2 head to a new Warrington Bank Quays Low Level station which would head from High Legh to Grappenhall then a short tunnel to a proposed new low level station at Bank Quays then leave in tunnel then come out at Lingley Green (North West Warrington) then head towards the M62 then head west towards Liverpool. East of Court Hey Park it would then head into tunnel to Liverpool City Centre (potential to a new High Speed station).

Why would bits of this route need to be in tunnel? Surely it should connect somewhere to the Arpley - Skelton route and go over Latchford Viaduct!

 

[john prytherch]

Why would parts of this route need to be in tunnel? Surely it should connect somewhere to the Arpley - Skelton trackbed and go over Latchford Viaduct!

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Why would parts of this route need to be in tunnel? Surely it should connect somewhere to the Arpley - Skelton trackbed and go over Latchford Viaduct!

Tunnel under built up areas of Lingley Green and Grappenhall in Warrington.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Using Rail Map Online I was able to make a rough map through Warrington. Two tunnels are required at Warrington one at Grappenhall the other through Great Sankey and Lingley Green where is continues on the surface to Liverpool (until reaching the outskirts where it then dives again into tunnel.

 

[frodshamfella]

Going along the M62 corridor would be even further round than via Warrington, which is a compelling traffic objective anyway for Liverpool trains to replace Runcorn and be especially useful for NPR traffic as it could allow longer distance trains to be removed from the CLC route through Warrington. While any new Liverpool route will undoubtedly be longer than the beautifully engineered classic Grand Junction route via Weaver Junction, it will be faster and will avoid the scheduling constraints and operational risk of the the two track railway shared with local passenger trains and many long distance freights north of Crewe.

As someone who uses Runcorn to reach London, I wouldn't be attracted to travel into Warrington to take a London train due to traffic issues.

 

[MarkyT]

As someone who uses Runcorn to reach London, I wouldn't be attracted to travel into Warrington to take a London train due to traffic issues.

I think you're right removing Runcorn completely is a retrograde step, Especially since it is such a well established service. Assuming a NPR route enters Liverpool via the South Parkway corridor. a 'Widnes South' might substitute, alternated with the Warrington stop perhaps. I'd also introduce a stop at Liverpool South Parkway on all Liverpool trains.

 

[Glenn1969]

Would there still be a WCML London service at Runcorn and Liverpool after HS2/NPR?

 

[Esker-pades]

Would there still be a WCML London service at Runcorn and Liverpool after HS2/NPR?

Not one that runs down the WCML (the point of HS2 is to remove such services from the WCML).

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Not one that runs down the WCML (the point of HS2 is to remove such services from the WCML).

Actually there maybe. It may be retained but changed to serve more stations (e.g. Trent Valley and MKC). Retained for connectivity and becomes a semi-fast service. The point of hs2 is to remove the fast services and increase stopping/semi fast services or provide new services which are not currently possible due to lack of capacity.

 

[Esker-pades]

Actually there maybe. It may be retained but changed to serve more stations (e.g. Trent Valley and MKC). Retained for connectivity and becomes a semi-fast service. The point of hs2 is to remove the fast services and increase stopping/semi fast services or provide new services which are not currently possible due to lack of capacity.

True. LNWR (or a successor) was not something I was thinking about.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I'm not sure you can lobby for a direct HS2 service for Liverpool, and then lobby for a retained service at Runcorn.
It's either one or the other, I would have thought.
Also, if you insist on stopping at a Halton station and Liverpool South Parkway, you might as well save the money and not build the direct connection to HS2.
Chester, with much more significant traffic than Runcorn, won't be getting a direct HS2 service.

The simplest new route from Ashley to Liverpool would be parallel to the M56 to Preston Brook and then heading diagonally across the Mersey close to the new A533 bridge, joining the classic route near Ditton.
But that would miss Warrington.
Any route through Warrington would involve tunnelling and be hugely expensive, and still not properly integrate with the existing Warrington stations which are very awkwardly located in the centre.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

True. LNWR (or a successor) was not something I was thinking about.

Also Virgin may retain it as well but may stop at TV stations and serve places LNWR may not.

 

[john prytherch]

I'm not familiar with Rail Map online, but I thank Jorge Da Silva for making visible this plan showing a line tunnelling under Grappenhall (where I live). Is this a definite published plan from Northern Powerhouse Rail, or from HS2, or from Transport for the North, or from DfT, or from some other organisation? The concept of a tunnel under Grappenhall seems crazy - it would have to go under the Ship Canal and therefore be very deep!
I'm in favour of HS2 and NPR in principle, but I fear that such a dog's breakfast is being made of these projects that they may fail. In particular, so much of the new routes seems to be being proposed in tunnel or behind barriers, that if built they will be boring to travel on. Oldies like me are likely to prefer slower trains on the classic routes!
I am hoping, this week, to respond to Warrington Borough Council's local plan and local transport plan consultations. My main concern is that the route over Latchford Viaduct is reopened either for heavy or light rail. It has just been decaying since 1985, which is not good.

John Prytherch.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

I'm not familiar with Rail Map online, but I thank Jorge Da Silva for making visible this plan showing a line tunnelling under Grappenhall (where I live). Is this a definite published plan from Northern Powerhouse Rail, or from HS2, or from Transport for the North, or from DfT, or from some other organisation? The concept of a tunnel under Grappenhall seems crazy - it would have to go under the Ship Canal and therefore be very deep!
I'm in favour of HS2 and NPR in principle, but I fear that such a dog's breakfast is being made of these projects that they may fail. In particular, so much of the new routes seems to be being proposed in tunnel or behind barriers, that if built they will be boring to travel on. Oldies like me are likely to prefer slower trains on the classic routes!
I am hoping, this week, to respond to Warrington Borough Council's local plan and local transport plan consultations. My main concern is that the route over Latchford Viaduct is reopened either for heavy or light rail. It has just been decaying since 1985, which is not good.

John Prytherch.

No route has been announced though so it is a guessing game. I made the map but my proposal would serve Bank Quays as a key interchange then to Liverpool. Any alternative to my plan? It was all my idea on the maps. They have not released anything yet.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

...In particular, so much of the new routes seems to be being proposed in tunnel or behind barriers, that if built they will be boring to travel on...

Most of HS2 is such - the "in flight entertainment" provided in the trains will need to be good as there's not going to be much to see out of the windows since most of the route is either in tunnel, cuttings (including "false cuttings" for noise of visual mitigation,) or behind trees and noise fences. Such is the price of appeasing the NIMBYs.

IMHO, I doubt this is particularly a feature of HS rail - one suspects any new railway (or motorway or anything else) would be receiving similar treatment.

I recall similar experience riding the LGV's through France as far as Lyons. My recollection is most of it was pretty boring as there was often nothing to see out the window except a cutting face until we ran off the HS lines and onto their "classic" railway routes.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Stock hasn't even been ordered yet. And no one will pay the aame price to use a slower train. Theres already an aspiration to extend current services to at least Bolton once the knitting goes up, so it's never going to get withdrawn, any less than there being no North Wales service on HS2 which will undoubtedly cause outrage in the Welsh assembly. Funny how this doesn't get much mention on here, but it will eventually surface, before the like of Plaid Cymru rightly take huge advantage. Have to say from my own point of view, I think the extra HS2 line into Liverpool just isn't going to happen, because I just can't see where a brand new alignment would be built, but I could very easily see some of the lesser used infrastructure being used better. The low level line to Bank Quay is now virtually unused, the 4 track section is underutilised and needs reconfiguring anyway at Allerton and Edge Hill, so route it into Central as a slightly more radical plan alongside the Merseyrail. retake the road through Garston that once went to Cressington Jn. 4 track that section and take it into a rebuilt Central Station. Get the connections from the city line in there into an extra low level Island platform, and suddenly Liverpool is getting some serious connectivity. Lime St then gets its big release of capacity for new services. Or Winsford-Weaver can be 4 tracked with the main issue being Hartford station. It's not premium speed but it could be easily be 125 for some considerable distance I to Liverpool at a fraction of the cost of a brand new destructive line. (Try getting it ihrough St Helens & Knowsley without causing huge destruction for little to no local benefit)

As a new contributor, I've only just started to plough my way through this thread.

The above is quite a reasonable suggestion, (apart from maybe having my house compulsory purchased). Pity they only put a single track on the new bridge at Garston last month though!

 

[urbophile]

Four tracking through Cressington is not on, unless it was in a very expensive tunnel. You have two conservation areas - Cressington and Grassendale parks (plus Fulwood park further on), and the listed Cressington station. Much better to make more use of the slow line between Parkway and Edge Hill, and send local trains through the Wapping tunnel to an enlarged Central. That would create more capacity on the fast line which currently is used by most trains including stopping DMUs.