Ideas for HS2 and Post-HS2 WCML Timetables

[Jorge Da Silva]

I have only got 15tph to Euston out of a maximum of 18tph and 8tph out of Birmingham so anything you would add?

Also I will be adding my proposed WCML timetable post HS2. No services north of Lancaster as I have provided a third Glasgow to London service calling at Lockerbie, Motherwell, Oxenholme and Penrith.

What would you propose for the HS2 Timetable (remember there is still an extra 3tph to London to use up) and What would you like to see on the WCML post HS2 on LNWR and VTWC?

 

[gordonthemoron]

I'm not sure that fully using all capacity from day 1 is a good idea, either for HS2 or WCML. As for WCML, I'd like to see 6 tph IC trains stopping at all of Rugby, Milton Keynes and Watford (set down), two or three from Coventry and the rest from Trent Valley. At least one of the Trent Valley services should be a replacement for the existing LNWR stopping service to Crewe

 

[LOL The Irony]

View attachment 57809



I have only got 15tph to Euston out of a maximum of 18tph and 8tph out of Birmingham so anything you would add?

Also I will be adding my proposed WCML timetable post HS2. No services north of Lancaster as I have provided a third Glasgow to London service calling at Lockerbie, Motherwell, Oxenholme and Penrith.

What would you propose for the HS2 Timetable (remember there is still an extra 3tph to London to use up) and What would you like to see on the WCML post HS2 on LNWR and VTWC?

Every London service using Old Oak seems ridiculous. That's a high speed service every 2 minutes. There are places on the Underground with less trains per hour than that.

 

[Bevan Price]

I think you probably have too many HS2 services from "Year 1", and also that there will still be a need for classic WCML services through to Scotland -- e.g. from places not on HS2, as mentioned by "gordon" in the previous post - some of which are sadly neglected at present.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Every London service using Old Oak seems ridiculous. That's a high speed service every 2 minutes. There are places on the Underground with less trains per hour than that.

I think you probably have too many HS2 services from "Year 1", and also that there will still be a need for classic WCML services through to Scotland -- e.g. from places not on HS2, as mentioned by "gordon" in the previous post - some of which are sadly neglected at present.

That is I have heard the plan for OOC! I found it ridiculous too but I think there are 6 platforms so 18/6 is 3 that's 3tph per platform

I will for anyone else say this is the proposed timetable from 2033 (after ALL phases are complete).
I am struggling with the West Coast Timetable but I am thinking of:

ex-ICWC

• 1 Manchester service via Crewe and Wilmslow
• 1 Edinburgh and Glasgow service (alternating) via Birmingham
• 1 Liverpool service via Trent valley
• 1 Blackpool service via Birmingham
• 1 Holyhead Service via Trent valley
• 1 Wrexham service via Shrewsbury and Birmingham
• 1 Chester service

ex-LNWR I am struggling with if anyone has any suggestions?

Thinking of

1- Walsall service
1- Northampton non-stop
2- Northampton suburban
1- Wolverhampton via Birmingham
1- Crewe via Coventry and Trent Valleys (as proposed by WMCA)
1- Crewe via Trent Valley avoiding Coventry (as proposed by WMCA)

Beyond Crewe the two services above could go to either Manchester or Liverpool I suppose? But not sure what you think if you want to change anything please let me know your suggestions!

 

[Nunners]

I would start with the current WCML services that can be transferred directly to HS2:

1tph Liverpool via Stafford
1tph Manchester via Stoke-on-Trent
1tph Manchester via Crewe/Wilmslow
1tph Glasgow non-stop to Bank Quay
1tph North Wales via Crewe (although it would be good to have North Wales electrified by then, at least to Chester!)

These can be therefore taken off the WCML timetable, which leaves:

3tph WCML Birmingham, via Rugby (1), Watford (2), Milton Keynes (3)
As the Milton Keynes service currently continues to Scotland, I would duplicate that on both HS2 and WCML, and combine the Rugby and Watford services on the WCML. The WCML Scotland via Birmingham could have a stop added at Stafford, as it is no longer the fastest service and Stafford would provide more connectivity. I would put 3tph on HS2 London-Birmingham, as suggested above, all stopping at Interchange but 1 missing OOC.

I would leave the Manchester via Stoke and Milton Keynes on the WCML, and have 2tph going to Manchester on HS2 all the way, both stopping at Manchester Airport (pick-up/set-down only?) and 1 stopping Crewe and Birmingham Interchange.

I would take the Blackpool North Service off the WCML and put it on HS2, replacing the Rugby stop with Birmingham Interchange.

Extra services:

1tph extra Edinburgh/Glasgow via Crewe and Birmingham Interchange
1tph extra Liverpool stopping Birmingham Interchange but then fast to Runcorn
(extra 2tph Birmingham and 2tph Manchester already mentioned)

 

[Ianno87]

That is I have heard the plan for OOC! I found it ridiculous too but I think there are 6 platforms so 18/6 is 3 that's 3tph per platform

It's not ridiculous, it's necessary.

With a train every 3-4 minutes, and a two track railway either side, as soon as one train stops, the next one has to stop, and the one after, and so forth... so everything has to stop.

Besides, a good chunk of HS2's loads will want to transfer to the Elizabeth line as the fastest way to the West End, Liverpool Street, Canary Wharf, Stratford and Heathrow.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

It's not ridiculous, it's necessary.

With a train every 3-4 minutes, and a two track railway either side, as soon as one train stops, the next one has to stop, and the one after, and so forth... so everything has to stop.

Besides, a good chunk of HS2's loads will want to transfer to the Elizabeth line as the fastest way to the West End, Liverpool Street, Canary Wharf, Stratford and Heathrow.

My guess was that every train would stop for interchange purposes for Heathrow in particular.

 

[deltic]

Assumed HS2 service pattern for Phase 1 and 2A is

London Euston to Birmingham Curzon Street (3 trains per hour);
• London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly (three trains per hour);
• London Euston to Liverpool Lime Street (two trains per hour);
• London Euston to Preston (one train per hour); and
• London Euston to Glasgow Central (one train per hour).

That is 10tph

For Phase 2B assumed service pattern is

London Euston to Birmingham Curzon Street (3tph); -
London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly (3tph); -
London Euston to Leeds (3tph); -
London Euston to Liverpool Lime Street (2tph);
London Euston to Preston (1tph); -
London Euston to Glasgow Central/ Edinburgh Waverley (2tph); ; -
London Euston to York/Sheffield (1tph); -
London Euston to Leeds/ Sheffield (1tph); and
London Euston to Newcastle (2tph).

18thph

Assumptions for WCML and elsewhere on the network can be found at https://assets.publishing.service.g...699029/CS866_D_Assumptions_Report_PFM_7.1.pdf

 

[Ianno87]

My guess was that every train would stop for interchange purposes for Heathrow in particular.

It's core purpose for dispersal onto Crossrail town-bound (which is where the bulk of the interchange demand is likely to be bound for), although using it as a single change to Heathrow is a happy coincidence (and will be the destination of some HS2 demand too)

 

[Bald Rick]

Perhaps @The Planner can just post the actual proposed service specs and then we don’t need to continue?

 

[The Planner]

There is no timetable or TSS for the WCML after HS2 yet, it is still being worked on. The HS2 one is fairly set in stone, still some debate on how many call at Crewe and where north of Preston though.

 

[TommyL4]

It's core purpose for dispersal onto Crossrail town-bound (which is where the bulk of the interchange demand is likely to be bound for), although using it as a single change to Heathrow is a happy coincidence (and will be the destination of some HS2 demand too)

That may make sense. But I wonder why it would be necessary for all HS2 services to call at OOC in the opposite direction.
Surely the demand for the one-stop hopper journey from Euston to OOC, which is otherwise do-able with the Underground and Crossrail, wouldn't be high enough to justify making all high-speed trains call at OOC?

 

[si404]

I know Ianno87 raised similar points earlier, but it seems like others missed them.

That may make sense. But I wonder why it would be necessary for all HS2 services to call at OOC in the opposite direction.

First and foremost, capacity - it's much harder to run ~18tph on a two track railway if there's different stopping patterns.

However there's Heathrow, GWML, West London, Docklands, etc access to HS2 to think about - just as it disperses town-bound passengers over two stations and multiple lines, it collects passengers in two places (and holds them in those two places while they wait for their train) and from a range of different lines.

Surely the demand for the one-stop hopper journey from Euston to OOC, which is otherwise do-able with the Underground and Crossrail, wouldn't be high enough to justify making all high-speed trains call at OOC?

You miss the point of stopping HS2 trains at OOC - it's not for traffic to/from Euston (though there might be some, similar to Stratford International-St Pancras journeys), it's for traffic to/from The North.

And skipping OOC on certain HS2 trains will increase demand for OOC-Euston journeys as people would have to double-back via Euston.

That you forget the non-central London destinations from OOC, and talk about one-stop hoppers to Euston, suggests a very London-centric few of HS2.

 

[si404]

For Phase 2B assumed service pattern is

London Euston to Birmingham Curzon Street (3tph); -
London Euston to Manchester Piccadilly (3tph); -
London Euston to Leeds (3tph); -
London Euston to Liverpool Lime Street (2tph);
London Euston to Preston (1tph); -
London Euston to Glasgow Central/ Edinburgh Waverley (2tph); ; -
London Euston to York/Sheffield (1tph); -
London Euston to Leeds/ Sheffield (1tph); and
London Euston to Newcastle (2tph).

This seems to be not quite right - not least as Stoke is to be served. You also have 4tph to Leeds, so that's an error.

IIRC, the most-recent service assumptions are:

3tph Euston - Curzon Street
1tph Euston - Lime Street (portion left at Crewe, or extended to Lancaster, as possible options that have been modelled)
1tph Euston - Lime Street / Preston (split at Crewe)
2tph Euston - Glasgow Central / Edinburgh Waverley (split at Carstairs)
3tph Euston - Piccadilly
1tph Euston - Macclesfield (via Stafford and Stoke)
2tph Euston - Leeds
1tph Euston - Leeds / Sheffield (split East Midlands)
1tph Euston - York / Sheffield (split East Midlands)
2tph Euston - Newcastle

Which is 17tph due to Liverpool and Preston services merging into using one path, rather than separate paths, with the spare path created perhaps for a captive Liverpool train post-NPR (divert one of the via Runcorns to Chester?).

 

[TommyL4]

I know Ianno87 raised similar points earlier, but it seems like others missed them.
First and foremost, capacity - it's much harder to run ~18tph on a two track railway if there's different stopping patterns.

However there's Heathrow, GWML, West London, Docklands, etc access to HS2 to think about - just as it disperses town-bound passengers over two stations and multiple lines, it collects passengers in two places (and holds them in those two places while they wait for their train) and from a range of different lines.
You miss the point of stopping HS2 trains at OOC - it's not for traffic to/from Euston (though there might be some, similar to Stratford International-St Pancras journeys), it's for traffic to/from The North.

And skipping OOC on certain HS2 trains will increase demand for OOC-Euston journeys as people would have to double-back via Euston.

That you forget the non-central London destinations from OOC, and talk about one-stop hoppers to Euston, suggests a very London-centric few of HS2.

Ahh, I can see the point now. Sorry for any offense I may have caused. Not used to all high-speed trains calling at two stations which are only a few miles apart

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

This seems to be not quite right - not least as Stoke is to be served. You also have 4tph to Leeds, so that's an error.

IIRC, the most-recent service assumptions are:

3tph Euston - Curzon Street
1tph Euston - Lime Street (portion left at Crewe, or extended to Lancaster, as possible options that have been modelled)
1tph Euston - Lime Street / Preston (split at Crewe)
2tph Euston - Glasgow Central / Edinburgh Waverley (split at Carstairs)
3tph Euston - Piccadilly
1tph Euston - Macclesfield (via Stafford and Stoke)
2tph Euston - Leeds
1tph Euston - Leeds / Sheffield (split East Midlands)
1tph Euston - York / Sheffield (split East Midlands)
2tph Euston - Newcastle

Which is 17tph due to Liverpool and Preston services merging into using one path, rather than separate paths, with the spare path created perhaps for a captive Liverpool train post-NPR (divert one of the via Runcorns to Chester?).

That seems about right!

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Does anyone know how many paths there will be out of Euston per hour after HS2 is finished? Both LNW and ICWC.

 

[si404]

Ahh, I can see the point now. Sorry for any offense I may have caused.

No offense caused. It is an unusual situation that does take some getting used to.

 

[6Gman]

Does anyone know how many paths there will be out of Euston per hour after HS2 is finished? Both LNW and ICWC.

Surely it's better viewed as Fast Line and Slow Line (rather than LNW/ICWC), and it depends on what you run. Timing everything on the Fast at 110mph max, for example, could alter the figure (as opposed to mixed 110/125).

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Surely it's better viewed as Fast Line and Slow Line (rather than LNW/ICWC), and it depends on what you run. Timing everything on the Fast at 110mph max, for example, could alter the figure (as opposed to mixed 110/125).

Okay how many trains in total at 110 and how many at 125? Compared to the current 9 (fast) and 7 (slow)

 

[VT 390]

View attachment 57809



I have only got 15tph to Euston out of a maximum of 18tph and 8tph out of Birmingham so anything you would add?

Also I will be adding my proposed WCML timetable post HS2. No services north of Lancaster as I have provided a third Glasgow to London service calling at Lockerbie, Motherwell, Oxenholme and Penrith.

What would you propose for the HS2 Timetable (remember there is still an extra 3tph to London to use up) and What would you like to see on the WCML post HS2 on LNWR and VTWC?

Is there not going to be any HS2 services from Birmingham to Liverpool?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Is there not going to be any HS2 services from Birmingham to Liverpool?

Im surprised to say not from what I have seen! I would love to say there is going to be but the 'assumptions' so far say not. I do not know what the reason is but I think it is kind of stupid they haven't included it.

 

[Bald Rick]

Okay how many trains in total at 110 and how many at 125? Compared to the current 9 (fast) and 7 (slow)

In the standard hour there’s 12 on the fasts from Euston in the Down direction, 2 of which turn on to the slows (one at Ledburn, and one at MK; one of which drops into the ‘hole’ in front of the Tring stopper).

Then there are 7 of the slows, 3 of which turn on to the D.C. lines at Camden Junction, replaced (effectively) by 2 freights joining at Camden, and the Southern service joining at Wembley.

The future number of paths out of Euston post HS2 will not be constrained by Euston itself, but line capacity further up. However I suspect the capacity available will be broadly the same as today, but with more trains stopping on fast line platforms at MK and Watford.

 

[VT 390]

The future number of paths out of Euston post HS2 will not be constrained by Euston itself, but line capacity further up. However I suspect the capacity available will be broadly the same as today, but with more trains stopping on fast line platforms at MK and Watford.

As there will be less longer distance passengers travelling on these services will they get rid of the pick up/set down only rules at Watford all day and the pick up only rules at Milton Keynes in the evening peak?

 

[The Planner]

There is no timetable or TSS for the WCML after HS2 yet, it is still being worked on. The HS2 one is fairly set in stone, still some debate on how many call at Crewe and where north of Preston though.

As there will be less longer distance passengers travelling on these services will they get rid of the pick up/set down only rules at Watford all day and the pick up only rules at Milton Keynes in the evening peak?

We don't know yet.

 

[VT 390]

Once long distance services switch to HS2 I would like to see a regular service at each of Nuneaton, Tamworth and Lichfield on fast services (in addition to the current LNWR services) to allow these places a faster service to London and to the North.

 

[swt_passenger]

Once long distance services switch to HS2 I would like to see a regular service at each of Nuneaton, Tamworth and Lichfield on fast services (in addition to the current LNWR services) to allow these places a faster service to London and to the North.

Which is exactly what is described in the released capacity report linked in post#9 surely?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

UPDATED:

• York/Sheffield-London Euston Included
• 3tph shown between Leeds and London
• Stops where trains divide are now shown with no fill to distinguish them from normal stops.
• More stops at Birmingham Interchange

 

[Bletchleyite]

Lockerbie in the wrong place - it's on the Edinburgh branch

I don't see why you'd stop random Liverpools at Crewe rather than just one or both per hour "im Takt". Same with EM Hub.

Personally, I'd stop everything at Brum and Crewe for interchange.