HS2: London - Birmingham - Manchester

[Purple Orange]

If the eastern leg is cancelled, what services should be running on the line upon completion?

The HS2 network would have the following:

• 3 London - Manchester
• 3 London - Birmingham
• 2 London - Liverpool
• 2 London - Scotland
• 1 London - Macclesfield
• 2 Birmingham - Manchester
• 1 Birmingham - Scotland
• 6 spare London paths
• 3 spare Birmingham paths
• 4 available Manchester paths, should there be no NPR.

So what should be done with the spare capacity for future growth? I would propose a growth plan as follows:

Stage 1:

• 3rd Birmingham - Manchester (200m)
• 3rd London - Liverpool (200m)
• 4th London - Manchester (200m)
• 4th London - Birmingham (200m)
• 1st Birmingham - Liverpool (200m)

This would take up all the residual paths in to Birmingham and 3 of the 6 spare paths in to London

Stage 2 (should Manchester - Leeds NPR be built)

• Double all three Birmingham-Manchester services to 400m
• Double the 4th London - Manchester to 400m.
• Add a 5th and 6th London-Manchester at 400m, then extend 4 to Leeds (two split to head to Newcastle)
• Run 2 of the Birmingham-Manchester’s on to Leeds (1 splits to head to Newcastle)

Thoughts?

 

[WestRiding]

Not got a clue. It all seems rather pointless without the Eastern Leg. HS2 should be a network, not a line.

 

[ohgoditsjames]

Not got a clue. It all seems rather pointless without the Eastern Leg. HS2 should be a network, not a line.

Stop speaking complete sense!

 

[quantinghome]

Obviously the eastern leg should be built, but in this hypothetical scenario the climate change imperative would surely be to massively expand the Scottish services and ban Central Belt to London flights.

 

[Bald Rick]

If, and it’s a big if, the Eastern leg is postponed, then it is very likely that the branch to East Mids Parkway will still be built, as a cheap way of delivering a decent chunk of the benefit. Might be worth thinking about it in that context, as Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield would then need serving.

 

[Purple Orange]

If, and it’s a big if, the Eastern leg is postponed, then it is very likely that the branch to East Mids Parkway will still be built, as a cheap way of delivering a decent chunk of the benefit. Might be worth thinking about it in that context, as Nottingham, Derby and Sheffield would then need serving.

In such case, you could feasibly add 2 London-Nottingham and 2 London-Sheffield via Derby in to the service pattern I suggested in my OP. Although Birmingham services may not fit, but it also depends how much of a benefit the spur to the east mids gives to services to Curzon Street over New Street.

 

[cle]

How long would a journey to East Mids Parkway be, vs. a fast service today?

Nice enough for the East Midlands (in fact, Derby and Nottingham cities win out on this one), but a pretty ****ty journey time to Leeds and even Sheffield.

I would expand the Scotland services to avoid splitting (with some plane politics, and removing any Edinburgh services from Kings X) - and add a Birmingham frequency too. Probably another Lancs service to serve Wigan, Preston and Lancaster too. And wot Purple said. There are't that many options really.

Noted on the 'network' comments, but for decades it was just Paris-Lyons. The network came much later. A solid trunk knocking 30-60 mins off the most major journeys is the best start.

 

[JonathanH]

I would expand the Scotland services to avoid splitting (with some plane politics, and removing any Edinburgh services from Kings X) - and add a Birmingham frequency too. Probably another Lancs service to serve Wigan, Preston and Lancaster too. And wot Purple said. There are't that many options really.

How are all those extra services going to fit on the two track route north of Weaver Junction?

 

[WestRiding]

How long would a journey to East Mids Parkway be, vs. a fast service today?

Nice enough for the East Midlands (in fact, Derby and Nottingham cities win out on this one), but a pretty ****ty journey time to Leeds and even Sheffield.

And, you're going to get dumped at Euston, away from the other high speed services and eurostar, currently a cross platform connection at the same station. Sheffield to Folkestone I did in just under 3 and a half hours on Tuesday, so for me, I won't be using HS2, especially if it stops at East Midlands, I may as well stay on East Midlands Trains. (and yes people, we know Euston isn't far, but thats missing the point)

 

[Ianno87]

And, you're going to get dumped at Euston, away from the other high speed services and eurostar, currently a cross platform connection at the same station. Sheffield to Folkestone I did in just under 3 and a half hours on Tuesday, so for me, I won't be using HS2, especially if it stops at East Midlands, I may as well stay on East Midlands Trains. (and yes people, we know Euston isn't far, but thats missing the point)

Most arriving passengers aren't connecting, so hardly worth the tail wagging the dog.

 

[Bald Rick]

but it also depends how much of a benefit the spur to the east mids gives to services to Curzon Street over New Street.

Curzon St to Nottingham in under half a hour gives quite a bit...

 

[WestRiding]

Most arriving passengers aren't connecting, so hardly worth the tail wagging the dog.

Anything highspeed, should form a connected network. Integrated transport.

 

[Grumpy Git]

Anything highspeed, should form a connected network. Integrated transport.

This 100%.

This is the UK, so like electrification, it'll end-up half-arsed.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And, you're going to get dumped at Euston, away from the other high speed services and eurostar, currently a cross platform connection at the same station.

Nobody cares as hardly anybody is connecting onto Eurostar. They are mostly going to London.

 

[WestRiding]

Nobody cares as hardly anybody is connecting onto Eurostar. They are mostly going to London.

Eurostar is only a little part of it. South Eastern Highspeed serve the entire south coast. Its no different to people changing at Sheffield for Manchester or Leeds. We don't make them walk to a 'fictional new' Victoria to do so. And by nobody, I presume you mean yourself in the context of this, as an enthusiast. You are not speaking for the silent majority of the public who simply use trains without any interest but a simple journey.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 17 Sep 2021 ==

This 100%.

This is the UK, so like electrification, it'll end-up half-arsed.

Yep, too many enthusuasts just want to see a 'TGV' in northern england, at the expense of doing it properly.

 

[The Planner]

Curzon St to Nottingham in under half a hour gives quite a bit...

Certainly does when the current aspiration is to get it under an hour on the current infrastructure.

 

[Purple Orange]

How long would a journey to East Mids Parkway be, vs. a fast service today?

Nice enough for the East Midlands (in fact, Derby and Nottingham cities win out on this one), but a pretty ****ty journey time to Leeds and even Sheffield.

I would expand the Scotland services to avoid splitting (with some plane politics, and removing any Edinburgh services from Kings X) - and add a Birmingham frequency too. Probably another Lancs service to serve Wigan, Preston and Lancaster too. And wot Purple said. There are't that many options really.

Noted on the 'network' comments, but for decades it was just Paris-Lyons. The network came much later. A solid trunk knocking 30-60 mins off the most major journeys is the best start.

On that basis i dont think youd run to Leeds. Sheff perhaps.

Curzon St to Nottingham in under half a hour gives quite a bit...

Therefore it would be worth it. I doubt there will be such a line though.

 

[Ianno87]

Anything highspeed, should form a connected network. Integrated transport.

No. Connections should be provided to satisfy the majority of passengers and forecast future flows.

Sharing the letters "HS" seems to distract people from forming a coherent transport network.

 

[The Planner]

Therefore it would be worth it. I doubt there will be such a line though.

Then a decision on that would need to be made fairly quickly as otherwise you will have a big redundant part of the delta junction in the West Mids.

 

[Bald Rick]

On that basis i dont think youd run to Leeds. Sheff perhaps.


Therefore it would be worth it. I doubt there will be such a line though.

I think it will happen. Might be £4-6bn, takes nearly half an hour off London - Derby / Sheffield (before any further upgrades north of Trent that might happen) and London - Nottingham, and 45-50 minutes off Birmingham - Nottingham. Frees up the MML in a few places. Provides a better service to the East Midlands than the original eastern leg plan. It also delivers all this to ‘stakeholders’ in the East Mids and S Yorks, without the hassle of building a new line through their patch. Seems like an easy win.

 

[Purple Orange]

I think it will happen. Might be £4-6bn, takes nearly half an hour off London - Derby / Sheffield (before any further upgrades north of Trent that might happen) and London - Nottingham, and 45-50 minutes off Birmingham - Nottingham. Frees up the MML in a few places. Provides a better service to the East Midlands than the original eastern leg plan. It also delivers all this to ‘stakeholders’ in the East Mids and S Yorks, without the hassle of building a new line through their patch. Seems like an easy win.

I guess that would fit with a growth towards 4 tph between each of the three core cities on captive stock, with 2 tph on the branches to Scotland, Liverpool, Sheffield and Nottingham.

 

[HSTEd]

I've had doubts about the eastern leg since they moved the alignment out of Sheffield.

With the TP upgrade Leeds via Manchester is likely to beat the ECML route easily, with NPR even York (and thus the north ECML) will be competitive via Manchester.

The rationale for anything north of Toton/East Mids falls away at that point - although it would be intriguing to see a study on an upgrade for the Nottingham-Newark line.....

 

[adrock1976]

For East Midlands Region, mention has been made of reduced journey times Birmingham - Derby and Nottingham, but what about the other two cities that gave their name to the counties that HS2 does not serve i.e. Leicester and Lincoln?

 

[The Planner]

For East Midlands Region, mention has been made of reduced journey times Birmingham - Derby and Nottingham, but what about the other two cities that gave their name to the counties that HS2 does not serve i.e. Leicester and Lincoln?

New St - Leicester is around the 50 minute mark now. Curzon St to Toton is down as 20 minutes, Toton to Leicester will be 15 odd, possibly up to 7-8 minute connection so 45 minutes via HS2. Not sure it would pass "is it worth the change of trains" for people. Lincoln is just an add on of Nottingham.

 

[Senex]

New St - Leicester is around the 50 minute mark now. Curzon St to Toton is down as 20 minutes, Toton to Leicester will be 15 odd, possibly up to 7-8 minute connection so 45 minutes via HS2. Not sure it would pass "is it worth the change of trains" for people. Lincoln is just an add on of Nottingham.

I'd certainly say "Not worth a change of trains" to save about 5 minutes with all the hassle of uncertain connections, find your new seat, etc — especially if you're coming home from shopping in Birmingham with a load to carry.

 

[cle]

I actually think in this scenario, getting to East Midlands Parkway is more useful than ending at Toton - which is a nothing parkway without the HS route north.

It actually serves Derby and Nottingham intuitively. And onwards to Chesterfield and Sheffield better than from Toton either. So those places are well covered.

Leeds and York - not sure what a fastest Derby-Doncaster (wired by then, 55m today) journey time would be, but I'd expect that unless NPR delivers something, the ECML will still be the main route for both.

As for the WCML, adding 4tph doesn't help the intermediate places and Euston capacity much, unless some of those additional services leave the line around Lichfield, or Crewe - and mop up some more TV and Staffs/Cheshire calls. Enabling less services running out of Euston that far for TV calls - and more turning at Bletchley, MKC, Northampton and Rugby, in various patterns.

 

[Glenn1969]

I think it will happen. Might be £4-6bn, takes nearly half an hour off London - Derby / Sheffield (before any further upgrades north of Trent that might happen) and London - Nottingham, and 45-50 minutes off Birmingham - Nottingham. Frees up the MML in a few places. Provides a better service to the East Midlands than the original eastern leg plan. It also delivers all this to ‘stakeholders’ in the East Mids and S Yorks, without the hassle of building a new line through their patch. Seems like an easy win.

what does it do for the rest of us in other parts of Yorkshire?

 

[Purple Orange]

I actually think in this scenario, getting to East Midlands Parkway is more useful than ending at Toton - which is a nothing parkway without the HS route north.

It actually serves Derby and Nottingham intuitively. And onwards to Chesterfield and Sheffield better than from Toton either. So those places are well covered.

Leeds and York - not sure what a fastest Derby-Doncaster (wired by then, 55m today) journey time would be, but I'd expect that unless NPR delivers something, the ECML will still be the main route for both.

As for the WCML, adding 4tph doesn't help the intermediate places and Euston capacity much, unless some of those additional services leave the line around Lichfield, or Crewe - and mop up some more TV and Staffs/Cheshire calls. Enabling less services running out of Euston that far for TV calls - and more turning at Bletchley, MKC, Northampton and Rugby, in various patterns.

Im not sure how the WCML would be adversely affected in this scenario? With a lone fuly built to Manchester the capacity on the intermediate stations doesnt change with or without eastern branch.

 

[cle]

Im not sure how the WCML would be adversely affected in this scenario? With a lone fuly built to Manchester the capacity on the intermediate stations doesnt change with or without eastern branch.

What I'm saying is that - if we are increasing Liverpool and Manchester to 4tph - can those frequencies be slower, and thus in turn cover some calls which Euston WCML services might still be on for, like Trent Valley, Stoke etc...by leaving HS2 at Lichfield or Crewe - and thus free up capacity further south.

Would be an added benefit - vs 4tph fast HS2 to Liverpool and to Manchester, which would be 'carting fresh air' as folks like to say.

 

[Purple Orange]

What I'm saying is that - if we are increasing Liverpool and Manchester to 4tph - can those frequencies be slower, and thus in turn cover some calls which Euston WCML services might still be on for, like Trent Valley, Stoke etc...by leaving HS2 at Lichfield or Crewe - and thus free up capacity further south.

Would be an added benefit - vs 4tph fast HS2 to Liverpool and to Manchester, which would be 'carting fresh air' as folks like to say.

Manchester might grow to 4 tph to London, even to Birmingham too, but that would be on HS2 rather than the WCML. Basically if the capacity at the HS2 stations at those three cities exists due to the eastern branch not being built, I suspect that over time we will see their frequency grow. As an example, today Leeds to Manchester has 4 fast services running at about 50 mins plus a number of slower services. Post HS2, Birmingham to Manchester will be faster than Leeds to Manchester is today and if the capacity is there I see no reason why frequencies between thise two cities wouldnt be on a par with Leeds-Manc today.