The next UK HSR (High Speed Rail) project?

[Ken H]

I think an east coast main line diversion would be the most likely. Maybe the Welwyn bottleneck. A green field route so no complications of changing an existing railway. Maybe one round Doncaster to avoid all the conflicting movements.

 

[Mikey C]

How has Brexit affected London/Dublin passenger numbers?

An indy Scotland would still remain part of the common travel area (as does the Republic) and with c £5m air journeys between EDI/GLA and London airports an independent Scotland would have to adopt north Korea style isolationism for the numbers to drop to 'very few'.

On topic I would have thought a high speed connection to Scotland is almost certainly the next high speed rail project in the British Isles - whether or not it is the UK at the time.

Exactly, England would still be Scotland's main trading partner whatever the EU status of either country. And unless you run thousands of ferries between Scotland and mainland Europe, all land traffic will still have to go through England to get there.

Whether an independent Scotland could afford its share of the high speed rail link is another matter of course!

 

[class26]

Is there enough capacity after Reading for it to make a difference? and at Paddington?

I don't think HSR OOC to Bristol would actually save enough time to be worth it, it's not a particularily long journey now. A new alighmnent might speed things up in S. Wales a bit I odn't know the line speed. Plymouth to Birmingham via Bristol post HS2 would actually make a noticeable difference ( especially to people who currently fly ) - journeys on that route are in 7 figures per year - but I suspect the chances of money being actually spent is miniscule.

Really though I suspect there won't be any HSR planned post HS2.

You can`t fly Plymouth to B`ham as there`s no airport in Plymouth anymore !

 

[HSTEd]

How has Brexit affected London/Dublin passenger numbers?

London/Dublin numbers are already suppressed because they already have to go through a hard border to travel, imposed by airline security.

An indy Scotland would still remain part of the common travel area (as does the Republic) and with c £5m air journeys between EDI/GLA and London airports an independent Scotland would have to adopt north Korea style isolationism for the numbers to drop to 'very few'.

Leaving aside that it is far from certain that it is possible for Scotland to join the EU and remain in the Common Travel Area given the requirements of new EU member states to join Schengen.
There will still have to be single market checks like those that are now being imposed between NI and GB.

There would be a defacto hard border between England and Scotland as a result, with all that implies for population mobility.

On topic I would have thought a high speed connection to Scotland is almost certainly the next high speed rail project in the British Isles - whether or not it is the UK at the time.

Why?
It's not in the SNPs interests as it would increase population mobility between Scotland and England and thus weaken the case for independence.

And the UK government is not going to spend the political capital to impose it given its likely rather poor business case.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 12 Jan 2022 ==

Exactly, England would still be Scotland's main trading partner whatever the EU status of either country. And unless you run thousands of ferries between Scotland and mainland Europe, all land traffic will still have to go through England to get there.

That is exactly what the Republic of Ireland is doing? - Guardian:

Volumes of goods shipped directly from Ireland to the EU on new Brexit-busting ferry routes have rocketed by 50% in the past six months as exporters seek to avoid travelling across land through Great Britain, according to official data.

It's far from difficult to imagine Scotland-EU ferries taking up the bulk of traffic.

But this is rather off topic.

 

[MattRat]

You can`t fly Plymouth to B`ham as there`s no airport in Plymouth anymore !

There is an airport nearby though, right? Exeter or something. Wouldn't that then become the best destination for a new line to end at, or at least nearby.

 

[cle]

I thought a London-Slough tunnel (similar to London-Croydon/Bromley/Surbiton ones mentioned in the past) which is ostensibly 6 tracking the GWML, vs being a high-speed based outcome. Similar could be useful on the various radials I mentioned, plus Shenfield. Crossrail has freed up platform space in both Paddington and Liverpool St, and the immediate approaches after all.

Taking a tunnel a little further, you might be able to link into Basingstoke and cover off some SWML routes too. But again, the route is fast so it's more capacity.

Other than that, I would say (and hope for, given domestic flight goals) - something north of Carlisle. The bypasses make sense, but HS again not needed for many.

 

[MattRat]

Just a general reply, but I've seen many people mention Scotland. Wouldn't it be more likely for a line to be built serving major Scottish cities than trying to connect Scotland and England better? Funded by the Scottish government, of course.

 

[cle]

Just a general reply, but I've seen many people mention Scotland. Wouldn't it be more likely for a line to be built serving major Scottish cities than trying to connect Scotland and England better? Funded by the Scottish government, of course.

Edinburgh-Glasgow is a little like Liverpool/Leeds-Manchester. Too close for true high speed and there are a few options already. Not to mention intermediate demand points, vs P2P. Improvements are wiser.

Aberdeen especially, but Dundee too - could do with quicker services to the Central Belt. The 'trunk' splits early due to geography (Glasgow via Stirling, Edinburgh quicker via Fife) - so there isn't a critical scale to tap into for HS - I would say that improvements (beginning with wires, but track/signal work too) at the extremities would benefit more users.

And that knocking another 20-30 mins off a journey to Carlisle (from Glasgow/Edinburgh to London/Birmingham on HS, more via Preston inc Manchester) would have a higher return - not least for the Scottish government.

 

[MattRat]

Edinburgh-Glasgow is a little like Liverpool/Leeds-Manchester. Too close for true high speed and there are a few options already. Not to mention intermediate demand points, vs P2P. Improvements are wiser.

Aberdeen especially, but Dundee too - could do with quicker services to the Central Belt. The 'trunk' splits early due to geography (Glasgow via Stirling, Edinburgh quicker via Fife) - so there isn't a critical scale to tap into for HS - I would say that improvements (beginning with wires, but track/signal work too) at the extremities would benefit more users.

And that knocking another 20-30 mins off a journey to Carlisle (from Glasgow/Edinburgh to London/Birmingham on HS, more via Preston inc Manchester) would have a higher return - not least for the Scottish government.

That's not how politicians see it. And I was more talking about political will. That's why I mentioned Scottish funding. As for route, I see a route from Stirling to Aberdeen, through Perth and Dundee. It splits south of Stirling to either Glasgow or Edinburgh, with maybe a triangle to also serve those two with a semi dedicated line, so traffic between the two is off the other lines, freeing capacity, but also serves other cities via the Aberdeen line so gets more use. Yes, it's a bit out the way for Edinburgh to Dundee and Aberdeen, but higher line speed should make up for that a little, and two other cities get served making it more financially viable.

 

[The Ham]

There would be a defacto hard border between England and Scotland as a result, with all that implies for population mobility.

Which in theory could mean a significant shift away from road based travel (if there's actual passport checks undertaken on the boarder) as driving would mean a stop to do so, whilst rail could be done on the move (like Eurostar).

With air travel unlikely to be able to cater for significant volumes of traffic, due to the limits on the numbers being able to be carried on each aircraft, then a dedicated high speed (rail) route could be useful. Especially if you could also do a Eurotunnel type service to take road vehicles far enough that it reduced travel time by (say) 30 minutes so that check in times were offset. As that would keep journey times the same as currently whilst bypassing the need to do passport control in your car.

It would also aid with all those people who are worried about their travel to Scotland in an EV, as even if no charge was given whilst checking-in the range wouldn't being used up.

 

[class26]

There is an airport nearby though, right? Exeter or something. Wouldn't that then become the best destination for a new line to end at, or at least nearby.

Yes, but you still cannot fly to B`ham. Too close

 

[MattRat]

Yes, but you still cannot fly to B`ham. Too close

Flights are available....

 

[Irascible]

You can`t fly Plymouth to B`ham as there`s no airport in Plymouth anymore !

Yes, but you still cannot fly to B`ham. Too close

Good grief. You can fly from Newquay to Manchester, or Exeter to Manchester, or either of them to Leeds ( or Scotland but good luck competing with that even with HSR ) much of which would collapse if you could get a HS line most of the way ( including using bits of HS2 ). HSR doesn't mean you can't pick up people between A and B. Additionally, it's already an overloaded rail route although the current state of XC doesn't help.

 

[MattRat]

Good grief. You can fly from Newquay to Manchester, or Exeter to Manchester, or either of them to Leeds ( or Scotland but good luck competing with that even with HSR ) much of which would collapse if you could get a HS line most of the way ( including using bits of HS2 ). HSR doesn't mean you can't pick up people between A and B. Additionally, it's already an overloaded rail route although the current state of XC doesn't help.

This too. Although to benefit XC travellers most you'd also want to connect Newcastle into the network (Edinburgh can go via Manchester).

 

[Gareth]

An indy Scotland would still remain part of the common travel area (as does the Republic) and with c £5m air journeys between EDI/GLA and London airports an independent Scotland would have to adopt north Korea style isolationism for the numbers to drop to 'very few'.

A massive assumption that Indiana Jones Scotland would be in the so-called Common Travel Area. Doubly so if it wants to join the EU, in which case, it may not be possible even if the UK government was open to it.

Regardless, adding an international border hardly helps the case for a high speed line.

I still stick to my belief that there'll be no significant stretches of new high speed line. The maximum case scenario was always HS2 built in full. The realistic alternative scenarios were always building less of it, rather than adding on to it, as we've seen with the Leeds leg. That may get reinstated someday, but I wouldn't even bet on that.

 

[MattRat]

I still stick to my belief that there'll be no significant stretches of new high speed line. The maximum case scenario was always HS2 built in full. The realistic alternative scenarios were always building less of it, rather than adding on to it, as we've seen with the Leeds leg. That may get reinstated someday, but I wouldn't even bet on that.

It could also be revised, to run parallel the ECML to help ease capacity on that section.

 

[LLivery]

If you could somehow find a clear route through west London, I would build a similar line from Waterloo International.

Towards Reading? Or Woking direction?

Is there enough capacity after Reading for it to make a difference? and at Paddington?

I don't think HSR OOC to Bristol would actually save enough time to be worth it, it's not a particularily long journey now. A new alighmnent might speed things up in S. Wales a bit I odn't know the line speed. Plymouth to Birmingham via Bristol post HS2 would actually make a noticeable difference ( especially to people who currently fly ) - journeys on that route are in 7 figures per year - but I suspect the chances of money being actually spent is miniscule.

Really though I suspect there won't be any HSR planned post HS2.

I wouldn't really call for much more west of Reading apart from on the Reading to Basingstoke line, in turn helping SWML capacity.

Thinking if the mains had something like 2tph each for Newbury, Oxford/Banbury, Sailsbury/Exeter, and Windsor. Some call at Twyford, Maidenhead and Hayes & H, all call at Slough. Crossrail sees some extended from OOC to Heathrow (ideally Staines) and Slough. All the Cornish, Somerset, Cotswolds and Welsh IEPs onto the new route.

Paddington is an issue, although, with Crossrail and 14 GWML platforms, I'd be surprised if it was impossible to work, it wouldn't be more than 16(?) tph terminating there.

Birmingham to Bristol would be very interesting, it almost feels like a natural extension of HS2, although would the demand ever be considered enough? Other any maybe a political project to Scotland, I can't ever see anything major happening in reality.

 

[MattRat]

Birmingham to Bristol would be very interesting, it almost feels like a natural extension of HS2, although would the demand ever be considered enough?

It was cut becuase it didn't benefit London (political will). The only way Bristol to Birmingham (and beyond both) improves, would likely be a new line mirroring the GWML.

 

[Sussex Ben]

While I doubt it would ever see the light of day, a new line to relive the southern end of the ECML could be a worthwhile one. Something along the lines of London, (Stratford?), Stansted, Cambridge, then rejoin the ECML just south of Peterborough. I’d also provide a spur in the Cambridge area to allow services to run towards Ely and beyond.

Such a scheme could relieve the ECML south by taking all LDHS and Cambridge non-stop services out of Kings Cross, the West Anglia route by providing a new Stansted Express type service, and potentially the GEML if journey times to Norwich could be made attractive enough. As far as I can tell, the only real loser would be Stevenage as LNER services would be lost, however these could be replaced by a fast-ish service to Peterborough to connect with services further north given the released capacity.

Pie in the sky I know, but we are in the ‘Speculative Discussion’ area

 

[PTR 444]

Towards Reading? Or Woking direction?

To Heathrow where it splits into separate Reading and Woking branches.

 

[swt_passenger]

If you could somehow find a clear route through west London, I would build a similar line from Waterloo International.

Waterloo International? You mean the platforms fully used by the Windsor/Reading lines for the last few years?

 

[AndrewE]

I too would go for Brighton as a new southern terminus for HS2 (is that part c?) It's a pity the option wasn't taken up from the outset.
The Brighton line needs more capacity. Trains continuing south from Old Oak would save terminal capacity at Euston and could be dealt with more easily/with fewer platforms in succession at a through station, servicing and stabling could be handled with benefits all round away from London...

I agree that the S end of the ECML should be (needs to be) relieved by HS2. 2 or 3 tracks S of Peterborogh are ridiculous on something that calls itself a main line.

 

[HSTEd]

Waterloo International? You mean the platforms fully used by the Windsor/Reading lines for the last few years?

Will they still be used in the post coronavirus world where peak service levels are probably nothing like what they are today?

Ofcourse you could try something truly unprecedented and graft a HSL onto the Crossrail 2 core alignment. "This is Tooting Broadway, this service is for Exeter and calls at Wimbledon, New Maldon, Epsom, Gatwick, Brighton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Bournemouth and Exeter"

 

[PTR 444]

Waterloo International? You mean the platforms fully used by the Windsor/Reading lines for the last few years?

Yes that’s what I meant, but it’s a nice nod to the former purpose of terminating high speed trains between 1994 and 2007.

 

[Bald Rick]

A massive assumption that Indiana Jones Scotland would be in the so-called Common Travel Area

Is that a reference to Sean Connery?

 

[swt_passenger]

Will they still be used in the post coronavirus world where peak service levels are probably nothing like what they are today?

Ofcourse you could try something truly unprecedented and graft a HSL onto the Crossrail 2 core alignment. "This is Tooting Broadway, this service is for Exeter and calls at Wimbledon, New Maldon, Epsom, Gatwick, Brighton, Portsmouth, Southampton, Bournemouth and Exeter"

They’re still used today aren’t they? They won’t ever build a HS line such as you propose unless or until they run out of capacity anyway. Are you thinking of running it right along the coastal strip, or through the South Downs national park?

 

[zwk500]

I too would go for Brighton as a new southern terminus for HS2 (is that part c?) It's a pity the option wasn't taken up from the outset.
The Brighton line needs more capacity. Trains continuing south from Old Oak would save terminal capacity at Euston and could be dealt with more easily/with fewer platforms in succession at a through station, servicing and stabling could be handled with benefits all round away from London...

How do you get the trains through central London? gradient limits still apply to lines in tunnels. Not to mention that a High Speed Line provides precisely the wrong kind of capacity for the Brighton Line. It doesn't need trains at 150mph+, it needs space for trains to stop at key stations like Clapham Junction, East Croydon, Gatwick Airport, Haywards Heath and Brighton.

Yes that’s what I meant, but it’s a nice nod to the former purpose of terminating high speed trains between 1994 and 2007.

Ah yes, because we should route nationally strategic infrastructure on the basis of it being 'a nice nod'.

 

[MattRat]

While I doubt it would ever see the light of day, a new line to relive the southern end of the ECML could be a worthwhile one. Something along the lines of London, (Stratford?), Stansted, Cambridge, then rejoin the ECML just south of Peterborough. I’d also provide a spur in the Cambridge area to allow services to run towards Ely and beyond.

Such a scheme could relieve the ECML south by taking all LDHS and Cambridge non-stop services out of Kings Cross, the West Anglia route by providing a new Stansted Express type service, and potentially the GEML if journey times to Norwich could be made attractive enough. As far as I can tell, the only real loser would be Stevenage as LNER services would be lost, however these could be replaced by a fast-ish service to Peterborough to connect with services further north given the released capacity.

Pie in the sky I know, but we are in the ‘Speculative Discussion’ area

I thought north ECML was the problem area, not south. Although, it could be all of it....

 

[HSTEd]

They’re still used today aren’t they?

Well the timetable is hardly in equilibrium at the moment is it?

They won’t ever build a HS line such as you propose unless or until they run out of capacity anyway. Are you thinking of running it right along the coastal strip, or through the South Downs national park?

Well the coastal strip is where the stations have to be because its where the people live!
It's ~80 ish kilmoetres from Brighton to Southampton, which means stops at least Portsmouth and Worthing and maybe Bognor Regis, based on Kyushu Shinkansen experience.

Even 20km spacings gets you ~80mph average speed, 30km gets you ~110mph.

 

[SynthD]

The BML2 proposal is capacity without high speed. I think if they wanted that, to tunnel from Stewart’s lane to Esher/Croydon/Orpington.

I expect that future governments will rename HS2’s later phases as HS3 and above. Plus maybe more new rail going up into Scotland, Wales. It’s rehashing something better than shovel ready, it’s already in progress due to earlier people’s hard work.