Leeds 'HS2' station alternative use as ECML terminal

[quantinghome]

... probably over capacity in the new post covid world

Time will tell, but I don't see how covid has fundamentally altered people's desire/need for travel. The roads are just as busy now as they were pre-covid, and we still need to have a big switch away from cars to public transport. IMO it's a mistake to look at the current situation of suppressed rail demand and conclude that it is permanent and that the factors which have grown rail demand over the last 30 years will not reassert themselves.

 

[Neptune]

Do those 4tph TPE services include the stopper to Huddersfield? I'm guessing the other 3tph would be to Newcastle, Middlesbrough and Hull?

No I’ve based it around the personal view that 4tph running through Leeds would be better for reliability (the destination at either end is largely irrelevant). The stopper as well as the Wigan service are also irrelevant as they (generally) terminate in p13.

Better to have fewer longer trains for sheer reliability sakes. Not everywhere needs to be connected to everywhere else.

Time will tell, but I don't see how covid has fundamentally altered people's desire/need for travel. The roads are just as busy now as they were pre-covid, and we still need to have a big switch away from cars to public transport. IMO it's a mistake to look at the current situation of suppressed rail demand and conclude that it is permanent and that the factors which have grown rail demand over the last 30 years will not reassert themselves.

As it stands, the work done was based around the pre-covid peak traffic world which is far greater than any future off peak demand. Peak demand is not expected to return to 2019 levels as hybrid working is the future (however, let’s not debate this again).

Therefore even with forecast post covid growth, the new highly increased capacity at the north side of Leeds station will be absolutely fine. No need for further expensive and disruptive work ‘just because the space exists’.

 

[quantinghome]

As it stands, the work done was based around the pre-covid peak traffic world which is far greater than any future off peak demand. Peak demand is not expected to return to 2019 levels as hybrid working is the future (however, let’s not debate this again).

Therefore even with forecast post covid growth, the new highly increased capacity at the north side of Leeds station will be absolutely fine. No need for further expensive and disruptive work ‘just because the space exists’.

Even if hybrid working is the future, this won't stop rail demand from growing. The long term drivers behind rail growth are still present. At worst, Covid has pushed demand back to where it was 10 years ago, assuming there's no further short term bounce back since the end of last year. This gives us a bit of breathing space to plan for future growth. It doesn't mean that future growth won't happen.

Outside the M25, rail use is generally pretty poor. With the right investment in a metro-style regular interval stopping service, rail use in West Yorkshire could increase to London and south-east levels of modal share.

If Covid has permanently stopped rail demand from growing, this should be seen world-wide. Yet we see most other countries continuing with their rail investment plans. In Britain we seem to have this weird attitude to rail investment where we will only make an investment if we've already max out existing capacity and there's no other choice. Other countries plan for the future. We sit there hoping that we won't have to do anything until it's too late.

 

[Neptune]

Even if hybrid working is the future, this won't stop rail demand from growing. The long term drivers behind rail growth are still present. At worst, Covid has pushed demand back to where it was 10 years ago, assuming there's no further short term bounce back since the end of last year. This gives us a bit of breathing space to plan for future growth. It doesn't mean that future growth won't happen.

Outside the M25, rail use is generally pretty poor. With the right investment in a metro-style regular interval stopping service, rail use in West Yorkshire could increase to London and south-east levels of modal share.

If Covid has permanently stopped rail demand from growing, this should be seen world-wide. Yet we see most other countries continuing with their rail investment plans. In Britain we seem to have this weird attitude to rail investment where we will only make an investment if we've already max out existing capacity and there's no other choice. Other countries plan for the future. We sit there hoping that we won't have to do anything until it's too late.

But if you look at what I’m saying then you’ll realise that the platform 0 and associated track and signal works have future proofed that side of the station. Filling a car park with platforms would be completely superfluous and unnecessary except to a few enthusiasts who hate the idea of railway land with no tracks on it.

 

[quantinghome]

But if you look at what I’m saying then you’ll realise that the platform 0 and associated track and signal works have future proofed that side of the station. Filling a car park with platforms would be completely superfluous and unnecessary except to a few enthusiasts who hate the idea of railway land with no tracks on it.

Future proofed like platforms 1-3, 16 and 17 future proofed Leeds station back in 2002? That sort of future proofing?

Come on, no one knows the future that well. It's foolish to be so adamant that Leeds station won't need further expansion.

 

[Neptune]

Future proofed like platforms 1-3, 16 and 17 future proofed Leeds station back in 2002? That sort of future proofing?

Come on, no one knows the future that well. It's foolish to be so adamant that Leeds station won't need further expansion.

You can’t compare the 2 in that regard. Leeds first was a desperate here and now requirement.

The recent works have been designed to create more capacity than needed and were based on a realistic future demand.

You cannot go around spending taxpayers money (which will be desperately needed elsewhere for things that do exist) on filling every cm of railway owned land with tracks and platforms on a just in case basis. They become dubbed ‘white elephants’ on forums such as this.

Sensible money spent on Leeds will be to create more capacity on the south side and hopefully the east end. Extra west facing bays on the north side built for the sake of it will not help.

 

[Halifaxlad]

As has been pointed out in another recent thread it appears Northern are still planning on swapping 4 car 331s for 2, 3 car 331s and running them as 6 car sets on the Aire Valley line and I'm presuming the Wharf Valley.

I hate to break it but has anybody factored this into their capacity calculations ? Because whilst 4 car 333 can easily fit into platform 3, two 331s will end up off the platform and just past the signal.

Also quite frequently (in the evenings) a 3 car 170 leaves from platform zero a, whilst zero b being occupied by a four car 333. Platform zero can take 8 cars, it certainly won't be able to take 9!

I'm sure how true it is but I've heard rumors that 195s may end up on the Harrogate line, if they do then they surely will be as 4 car sets since otherwise 2 car will be a decrease in capacity compared to the 3 car 170s.

 

[Neptune]

As has been pointed out in another recent thread it appears Northern are still planning on swapping 4 car 331s for 2, 3 car 331s and running them as 6 car sets on the Aire Valley line and I'm presuming the Wharf Valley.

I hate to break it but has anybody factored this into their capacity calculations ? Because whilst 4 car 333 can easily fit into platform 3, two 331s will end up off the platform and just past the signal.

Also quite frequently (in the evenings) a 3 car 170 leaves from platform zero a, whilst zero b being occupied by a four car 333. Platform zero can take 8 cars, it certainly won't be able to take 9!

I'm sure how true it is but I've heard rumors that 195s may end up on the Harrogate line, if they do then they surely will be as 4 car sets since otherwise 2 car will be a decrease in capacity compared to the 3 car 170s.

As I’ve mentioned numerous times the capacity enhancements include all future plans which includes the introduction of 6 car trains on Leeds NW (a plan since 2016 no less).

You’re quite right, a 6 car won’t fit in p3. That doesn’t mean to say that they won’t fit elsewhere and p3 will be used for services up to 4 car length which will be the majority of services that use that part of the station.

I wish people would get it into their heads that the riverside car park at Leeds station is not going to filled with pointless excess platforms. Best to spend that money on projects that actually need to be done.

 

[quantinghome]

You can’t compare the 2 in that regard. Leeds first was a desperate here and now requirement.

The recent works have been designed to create more capacity than needed and were based on a realistic future demand.

You cannot go around spending taxpayers money (which will be desperately needed elsewhere for things that do exist) on filling every cm of railway owned land with tracks and platforms on a just in case basis. They become dubbed ‘white elephants’ on forums such as this.

Sensible money spent on Leeds will be to create more capacity on the south side and hopefully the east end. Extra west facing bays on the north side built for the sake of it will not help.

What are you trying to argue on this thread?

That additional bay platforms on the north side aren't needed right now? Sure, I agree. That much is obvious.

Or are you arguing that they will never be needed? I disagree.

Obviously we're not going to see more bay platforms in the next few years, but 10 years from now, 20? There are realistic scenarios which would require it.

 

[Halifaxlad]

As I’ve mentioned numerous times the capacity enhancements include all future plans which includes the introduction of 6 car trains on Leeds NW (a plan since 2016 no less).

You’re quite right, a 6 car won’t fit in p3. That doesn’t mean to say that they won’t fit elsewhere and p3 will be used for services up to 4 car length which will be the majority of services that use that part of the station.

I wish people would get it into their heads that the riverside car park at Leeds station is not going to filled with pointless excess platforms. Best to spend that money on projects that actually need to be done.

Yes but have these capacity enhancements that are mainly designed around service frequency and crossing conflicts taken into consideration platform capacity (obviously except for platform zero) and how signalers like to stack trains ?

Its all very well and good saying they will just use another platform but then that takes away platform space that might be needed for something else. Whilst the majority of services are currently four car quite a few will end up 6 car, which is my point.

A while ago some services ended up off the end of the platform when arriving into Leeds, once 6 car services start running the flexibility for signalers will inevitably be tighter than before!

Final point, just because someone comments it doesn't necessarily mean the commentator is calling for more platforms or is in support of more bay platforms to terminate services, personally I would rather have less West facing bays but that's just me!

 

[quantinghome]

Further development of Leeds is envisaged, it seems:

https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/new...rated-rail-plan-grant-shapps-confirms-3671986

Apparently it will take £100m to find the answer, which I suspect will be very similar to the one originally given by HS2.

 

[Bantamzen]

Outside the M25, rail use is generally pretty poor. With the right investment in a metro-style regular interval stopping service, rail use in West Yorkshire could increase to London and south-east levels of modal share.

Very possibly, certainly in the north-west corridor along the Aire & Wharfe valleys traffic levels are rapidly getting back to pre-covid levels, and with a back-log of roadworks kicking in we are seeing what the future will be like on them if rail capacity isn't looked at seriously as an alternative. I know recently in my neck the woods some new traffic lights being installed just over the Aire from Shipley brought incredible chaos, and delays that even the M25 would baulk at. And we all know what happens around the M1/62/621 when even the slightest thing goes wrong.

As has been pointed out in another recent thread it appears Northern are still planning on swapping 4 car 331s for 2, 3 car 331s and running them as 6 car sets on the Aire Valley line and I'm presuming the Wharf Valley.

I hate to break it but has anybody factored this into their capacity calculations ? Because whilst 4 car 333 can easily fit into platform 3, two 331s will end up off the platform and just past the signal.

Also quite frequently (in the evenings) a 3 car 170 leaves from platform zero a, whilst zero b being occupied by a four car 333. Platform zero can take 8 cars, it certainly won't be able to take 9!

I'm sure how true it is but I've heard rumors that 195s may end up on the Harrogate line, if they do then they surely will be as 4 car sets since otherwise 2 car will be a decrease in capacity compared to the 3 car 170s.

Given that Northern are actually reducing service out of Bradford FS on the triangle routes, I wouldn't be surprised to start seeing 3 car 331s running around even on the much busier Leeds-bound services. I'm expecting my commute to steadily get worse post May timetable changes, with literally no way of any kind of keeping similar timings between my home & office as I don't drive. The growing capacity loss will eventually bite Northern on their behinds, and this will spill over further into affecting all modes of transport in West Yorkshire, especially Leeds-bound ones.

 

[Halifaxlad]

I recently reading a r

Pretty much given away my entire idea in the post title. But to add a bit more detail, part of the dropped east leg of HS2 could be resurrected to link this station to any or all of Wakefield, Sheffield, Doncaster and South of Doncaster. New Lane would then take LNER and XC services out of the current station. That is if XC decides Newcastle trains will only go via Doncaster and Leeds trains will terminate.

If NPR was to split up services at Leeds then a new line could be built from the Huddersfield line at Morley and maybe follow the M621 in if possible? And on the other side using the HS2 proposal there'd just need to be a North facing link following the M1 to where HS2 was going to join the existing line at Ulleskelf. NPR services would have to be split into Liverpool & Birmingham to Leeds via Manchester and Leeds to Newcastle, Middlesbrough, Scarborough & Hull.

This leaves the current Leeds station entirely for local and regional services.

Ive been thinking about this more recently and Im beginning to quite like it!

Apart from the bit about following the M621 which would be impractical, instead what do you think about a new line running from Batley adjacent to the M62 using some of the disused formation before joining up with your new chord adjacent to the M1 @EastisECML ?

 

[YorksLad12]

While it's good to see my suggestion from previous threads (dark blue) in there, the light blue is a non starter because the route isn't there any more (unless you're tunnelling under Morley). Neither's the dark blue route, to be fair... The yellow route would need electrification, which pushes up the cost for not that much benefit as the existing route norther of Dewsbury/Batley is assumed to be able to cope with 4x fast, 2x semi-fasts and 2x stoppers.

 

[Halifaxlad]

While it's good to see my suggestion from previous threads (dark blue) in there, the light blue is a non starter because the route isn't there any more (unless you're tunnelling under Morley). Neither's the dark blue route, to be fair... The yellow route would need electrification, which pushes up the cost for not that much benefit as the existing route norther of Dewsbury/Batley is assumed to be able to cope with 4x fast, 2x semi-fasts and 2x stoppers.

The light blue route was just to show the old aligment, its only the middle section between the two yellow ones that is usable!

Can't remember why I decided to show more of the route probably just for those interested as to where it ran.

Its going to be interesting how it copes with NPR as from understanding the plan is to have 8 services from Leeds to Manchester in under 33 minutes which I presume will mean all fasts!