RailUK Forums
RailUK Forums > UK Railway Forums > Infrastructure & Stations > Future High Speed Rail


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 17th May 2017, 22:21   #151
edwin_m
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 21 Apr 2013
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 10,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbtc View Post
My guess is that some kind of link will happen, but HS2 is being carefully budgeted to ensure that it doesn't become liable for all of the "ancillary" benefits around the project.
...
So I'd wager that by the 2030s there'll be some link to New Street, or platforms on the existing lines to permit the kind of journey that you describe - but HS2 is being managed so that they don't foot the bill for these kind of improvements (and money will be found from the Network Rail budget or the West Midlands will fund it separately).

I'm not saying I agree with this approach, but it seems to be the way that projects happen nowadays - e.g. Crossrail wasn't going to go west of Maidenhead until the cost of electrifying to Reading was paid for by the GWML budget, then Crossrail could piggy-back on it...

...the problem is that it makes HS2 look half-finished and gives people some easy complaints to make about it - but I can see why HS2 want to ensure that they don't have to pay for all of the remodelling/ electrification/ extensions etc on the conventional network.
I just hope that the HS2 design includes passive provision, such as a straight section in a suitable place between Water Orton and the Washwood Heath tunnel where a connection can be made to the Derby line towards New Street. It always seems to be incredibly difficult to add these things later if they weren't allowed for in the original design.
__________________
These opinions are mine alone, unless anyone happens to agree with me.
edwin_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Registered users do not see these banners - join today!
Old 18th May 2017, 12:01   #152
LesF
LesF
Member
 
Join Date: 25 Mar 2014
Location: Coventry
Posts: 80
Default

"The nearest part of the Midland line to Victoria is about 400m away" - MML passes close to the ends of the Victoria platforms.
"a connection can be made to the Derby line towards New Street" - yes, and HS2 should connect into New St.
Curzon St station is planned to bridge over Moor St Queensway so passengers will descend from the station onto the north side of the dual carriageway and won't have to cross any roads to reach New St. The walking time between the station entrances is 5 minutes. Travelators can be added to the existing route. The problem is in the 420m platforms - too long for some passengers to walk. More travelators?
LesF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 13:14   #153
edwin_m
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 21 Apr 2013
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 10,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LesF View Post
"The nearest part of the Midland line to Victoria is about 400m away" - MML passes close to the ends of the Victoria platforms.
I was measuring to the entrance. The nearest part of the former platforms at Sheffield Victoria looks to be about 200m away. They would have to extend to 400m to accommodate a double HS2 set, but the extension couldn't be at this end because the former Great Central is on a curve between the former station and crossing the MML.

My point stands regarding this part of the MML being totally unsuitable to build a station. As well as the narrow cutting, any station here would either impinge on a junction to the south, or extend across a canal to the north. It's also on a gradient of 1 in 144.
__________________
These opinions are mine alone, unless anyone happens to agree with me.
edwin_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 14:01   #154
tbtc
I am the passenger...
Veteran Member
 
tbtc's Avatar
 
Join Date: 16 Dec 2008
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 14,107
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LesF View Post
"The nearest part of the Midland line to Victoria is about 400m away" - MML passes close to the ends of the Victoria platforms
Quote:
Originally Posted by edwin_m View Post
I was measuring to the entrance. The nearest part of the former platforms at Sheffield Victoria looks to be about 200m away. They would have to extend to 400m to accommodate a double HS2 set, but the extension couldn't be at this end because the former Great Central is on a curve between the former station and crossing the MML.

My point stands regarding this part of the MML being totally unsuitable to build a station. As well as the narrow cutting, any station here would either impinge on a junction to the south, or extend across a canal to the north. It's also on a gradient of 1 in 144.
I don't know if LesF has been round these parts recently, but the idea of putting a station on the Midland - Meadowhall line where the Woodburn - Victoria line crosses is a complete non-starter.

You've got the issues that edwin_m refers to above (narrow cutting, impacting upon the junction to the Midland - Woodburn line, the tough gradient that means most freight heading north from Sheffield does it at snails pace, the canal)...

...there's the ring road above the railway, there's no realistic hope of public access to platforms on the Meadowhall line (unless you expect passengers to come from Wicker into Victoria and then go down in a lift to the Meadowhall line underneath?), there's no integration with the tram, an interchange station would be so close to the existing one at Midland that the rear power car of an HST would still be in Midland whilst the front power car was at this new station...

...and then how many services per hour do you stop on the existing line (on that narrow strip of land between the Midland - Woodburn chord and the canal, with little scope for four tracking, to be blunt)...

...it's a complete non-starter - however it may look on a 2D map!

A station at Victoria would be worse than one at Meadowhall, as far as most of Sheffield goes (at least at Meadowhall there's parking, good road access, a bus station, a tram terminus, an existing station with several trains stopping per hour).
__________________
Irk The Purists?
tbtc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 14:33   #155
The Planner
1031
Established Member
 
Join Date: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 7,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by edwin_m View Post
I just hope that the HS2 design includes passive provision, such as a straight section in a suitable place between Water Orton and the Washwood Heath tunnel where a connection can be made to the Derby line towards New Street. It always seems to be incredibly difficult to add these things later if they weren't allowed for in the original design.
There is meant to be on that stretch but Im not sure how you could do it before the NR lines are fitted with ETCS due to the proximity of the two railways and presumably needing some sort of interchange between in cab and conventional signalling.
__________________
Not normally one for this but....all posted drivel is my own opinion and has nothing at all to do with my employer...social media policy and all that.
The Planner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 14:52   #156
boxy321
Member
 
Join Date: 20 Jun 2016
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LesF View Post
"Curzon St station is planned to bridge over Moor St Queensway so passengers will descend from the station onto the north side of the dual carriageway and won't have to cross any roads to reach New St. The walking time between the station entrances is 5 minutes. Travelators can be added to the existing route. The problem is in the 420m platforms - too long for some passengers to walk. More travelators?
Moor St Queensway to the left (looking east) of the current Moor St station entrance is one of the highest spots in Birmingham. What level will the platforms be at relative to the existing ones and the road?
boxy321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18th May 2017, 22:34   #157
edwin_m
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: 21 Apr 2013
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 10,523
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Planner View Post
There is meant to be on that stretch but Im not sure how you could do it before the NR lines are fitted with ETCS due to the proximity of the two railways and presumably needing some sort of interchange between in cab and conventional signalling.
Good point. Putting the HS2 end of the connection somewhere around Water Orton where HS2 starts to curve away south might be easier. Otherwise you're trying to feed a couple of flyovers through the plethora of columns supporting the M6.
__________________
These opinions are mine alone, unless anyone happens to agree with me.
edwin_m is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 10:51   #158
LesF
LesF
Member
 
Join Date: 25 Mar 2014
Location: Coventry
Posts: 80
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by boxy321 View Post
Moor St Queensway to the left (looking east) of the current Moor St station entrance is one of the highest spots in Birmingham. What level will the platforms be at relative to the existing ones and the road?
The platforms won't cross the road, but the passenger bridge will. That allows passengers to walk off the end of the plats, across Moor St on a bridge and down via stairs, escalators and lifts to the north side of Moor St without walking through road traffic. Curzon St station will remain at high level while WCML dives into New St at 1 in 40. See HS2's aerial view of the terminus station.
LesF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 12:25   #159
boxy321
Member
 
Join Date: 20 Jun 2016
Posts: 184
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LesF View Post
The platforms won't cross the road, but the passenger bridge will. That allows passengers to walk off the end of the plats, across Moor St on a bridge and down via stairs, escalators and lifts to the north side of Moor St without walking through road traffic. Curzon St station will remain at high level while WCML dives into New St at 1 in 40. See HS2's aerial view of the terminus station.
Cheers. I've read the pdf of the 'masterplan' from BCC now. Easy to find on Google.

So there will be 4 entrances, the Eagle & Tun will survive(!) with it's roof chopped off and there will be an almighty viaduct and lots of stairs and lifts. The foggy bit for me is where all the buses and cars will go from Moor St. and beggars alley.
boxy321 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 15:48   #160
snowball
Established Member
 
Join Date: 4 Mar 2013
Location: Leeds
Posts: 3,298
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Planner View Post
There is meant to be on that stretch but Im not sure how you could do it before the NR lines are fitted with ETCS due to the proximity of the two railways and presumably needing some sort of interchange between in cab and conventional signalling.
Wouldn't the NR lines only need to be fitted from the junction as far as New Street which would be the changeover point? There's a fair number of years to do the installation before Phase 1 opens, and the link would gain its main importance only with Phase 2b.
snowball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 16:29   #161
The Planner
1031
Established Member
 
Join Date: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 7,579
Default

It isnt going to be done for phase 1, it might not get done at all, its only passive provision. Water Orton was only resignalled recently and no one has any plans to go in again, especially as you would have to sort New St again as soon as its been resignalled.
__________________
Not normally one for this but....all posted drivel is my own opinion and has nothing at all to do with my employer...social media policy and all that.

Last edited by The Planner; 19th May 2017 at 16:30.
The Planner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19th May 2017, 19:53   #162
LesF
LesF
Member
 
Join Date: 25 Mar 2014
Location: Coventry
Posts: 80
Default

I'm surprised anyone from Sheffield of all places should be worried about changes of level. What's wrong with stairs, escalators and lifts? Even more surprised that a Sheffielder should object to a high speed station after they lost Meadowhall.
MML cutting is 20m wide - adequate for 2 tracks and two plats.
MML plats can run from the A57 road bridge (clear of the rail junction) and over the canal bridge - it's 18m wide. While 2 MML stations so close together are not ideal, trains don't get up much speed from Midland station to crossing under GC so it's not much of a time penalty for the extra stop.
Victoria 420m straight plats (if really necessary to be that long) can end 100m from MML plats - not too far to walk. The Victoria line obviously needs realignment within the railway boundary.
Victoria only needs 2 plats as all trains will be through services e.g. up to 4 HS and 2 locals/hr and a bit of freight.
There's lots of wasteland and low-grade storage in the area and it would benefit from redevelopment.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?
view=detailV2&ccid=niR5FqTL&id=10D10DD7DD078678CDEBEE3387831B59F7219396&thid=OIP.niR5FqTL08qWwjrI3fP hdgEsC6&q=sheffield+victoria+station+track+plan&simid=608029519327331869&selectedindex=31&ajaxhist=0 &first=1
shows what could be done.
LesF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2017, 12:17   #163
Class 170101
Established Member
 
Join Date: 1 Mar 2014
Posts: 3,534
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Planner View Post
It isnt going to be done for phase 1, it might not get done at all, its only passive provision. Water Orton was only resignalled recently and no one has any plans to go in again, especially as you would have to sort New St again as soon as its been resignalled.
Why would you need to re-signal New Street surely passive provision should be provided there as well?
__________________
These views are all Personal Opinions
Class 170101 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2017, 12:24   #164
Ianno87
Established Member
 
Join Date: 3 May 2015
Posts: 1,314
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LesF View Post
I'm surprised anyone from Sheffield of all places should be worried about changes of level. What's wrong with stairs, escalators and lifts? Even more surprised that a Sheffielder should object to a high speed station after they lost Meadowhall.
MML cutting is 20m wide - adequate for 2 tracks and two plats.
MML plats can run from the A57 road bridge (clear of the rail junction) and over the canal bridge - it's 18m wide. While 2 MML stations so close together are not ideal, trains don't get up much speed from Midland station to crossing under GC so it's not much of a time penalty for the extra stop.
Victoria 420m straight plats (if really necessary to be that long) can end 100m from MML plats - not too far to walk. The Victoria line obviously needs realignment within the railway boundary.
Victoria only needs 2 plats as all trains will be through services e.g. up to 4 HS and 2 locals/hr and a bit of freight.
There's lots of wasteland and low-grade storage in the area and it would benefit from redevelopment.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?
view=detailV2&ccid=niR5FqTL&id=10D10DD7DD078678CDEBEE3387831B59F7219396&thid=OIP.niR5FqTL08qWwjrI3fP hdgEsC6&q=sheffield+victoria+station+track+plan&simid=608029519327331869&selectedindex=31&ajaxhist=0 &first=1
shows what could be done.
Two tracks on two platforms will not be adequate for MML traffic at that location, given the density of services on this section (and thinking about future growth)

And the station environment (in a deep cutting) would be horrible.

And if you get off at the wrong end of an HS2 train, you've got half a kilometre to walk, and then some vertical circulation.
__________________
All opinions are most definitely my own.
Simply because who else would spout such utter twaddle?
Ianno87 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20th May 2017, 12:44   #165
The Planner
1031
Established Member
 
Join Date: 15 Apr 2008
Posts: 7,579
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Class 170101 View Post
Why would you need to re-signal New Street surely passive provision should be provided there as well?
Core of New St is planned for 2021 and there is no plan for ETCS, the rest of New St is done this Christmas and next May, no chance of redesigning that now as they are out on the ground.
__________________
Not normally one for this but....all posted drivel is my own opinion and has nothing at all to do with my employer...social media policy and all that.
The Planner is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:19.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8
© RailUK Forums 2005 - 2017