HS2 Northern Branches Discussion

[The Ham]

Its still coming to close to my house and I wont be able to use it without an hours journey into London!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

However you will benefit from East West Rail, enabiling you to get to the Milton Keynes fairly quickly where, because of HS2, you will are likely to have a larger number of services calling there. These are possibly going to include some fast trains (although proberbly a little slower than at present) going up along the WCML.

Meaning that although you will not have HS train services, a trip to say Glasgow (even just staying on the WCML) will be a lot faster than it is at present as you no longer have to spend an hour getting into London only to come back out again to only be a few miles from where you started on route north. This is also likely to make it cheaper for you, as even if the cost per mile is higher the number of miles will be less.

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Talking about the routes that could be run beyond HS2 people always think of routes to/from London. Is it possible that we could have routes that used the northern sections of HS2 running to other locations (in a similar wau to the way XC services run avoiding London)?

For instance could you have services running Edinburgh to York on the existing network, then running to Birmingham on the HS network and then running on the existing network to somewhere like Cardiff or Plymouth.

Such services would use up the paths that would normally be taken up on the southern section by services which ran between London & Birmingham only, and so would not impact on the planned HS services.

 

[sprinterguy]

Talking about the routes that could be run beyond HS2 people always think of routes to/from London. Is it possible that we could have routes that used the northern sections of HS2 running to other locations (in a similar wau to the way XC services run avoiding London)?

For instance could you have services running Edinburgh to York on the existing network, then running to Birmingham on the HS network and then running on the existing network to somewhere like Cardiff or Plymouth.

Such services would use up the paths that would normally be taken up on the southern section by services which ran between London & Birmingham only, and so would not impact on the planned HS services.

I don’t believe that there is any such plan. There are no planned connections into the classic rail network in the West Midlands area that would allow for trains running on HS2 from the north to head towards the South West. If you were going to essentially re-route Crosscountry services to use the North East arm of HS2 then it would have to tie in with electrification towards the South West from Birmingham. It is plausible that the section between Birmingham and Bristol will be fully electrified by the 2030s, although it does not seem to be a high priority as a candidate for electrification at the present time.

The opening of the second phase of HS2 can be expected to lead to widespread changes to the Crosscountry network in any case. I envisage that this will lead to the Crosscountry network being divided into a number of shorter distance regional services, with long distance Crosscountry passengers from the North East to the South West using HS2 services from Edinburgh and Newcastle and then changing onto a regional service on the classic network at Birmingham.

 

[MidlandMainlie]

I don’t believe that there is any such plan. There are no planned connections into the classic rail network in the West Midlands area that would allow for trains running on HS2 from the north to head towards the South West. If you were going to essentially re-route Crosscountry services to use the North East arm of HS2 then it would have to tie in with electrification towards the South West from Birmingham. It is plausible that the section between Birmingham and Bristol will be fully electrified by the 2030s, although it does not seem to be a high priority as a candidate for electrification at the present time.

If such plans did exist then where could a connection to the classic network be made?

 

[nerd]

Talking about the routes that could be run beyond HS2 people always think of routes to/from London. Is it possible that we could have routes that used the northern sections of HS2 running to other locations (in a similar wau to the way XC services run avoiding London)?

For instance could you have services running Edinburgh to York on the existing network, then running to Birmingham on the HS network and then running on the existing network to somewhere like Cardiff or Plymouth.

Such services would use up the paths that would normally be taken up on the southern section by services which ran between London & Birmingham only, and so would not impact on the planned HS services.

Something like that is indeed intended; services from Edinburgh and Glasgow, joining the HS2 Phase 2 at Manchester Outskirts, and then running on to Birmingham.

Plus services from Newcastle joining HS2 Phase 2 south of Leeds, and again terminating in Brum.

Both allow use of the 'spare' capacity on Phase 2 North of the 'Y' junction.

If Phase 3 towards Scotland is built on from Phase 2 (either westwards north of Preston, or eastwards north of Leeds) then I would expect classic compatible services to run join HS2 from the electrified Trans Pennine route.

So: Lime Street to Glasgow High Street via HS2 (west),

.. or Hull to Edinburgh Haymarket via HS2 (east).

 

[sprinterguy]

If such plans did exist then where could a connection to the classic network be made?

The HS2 branch into central Birmingham will shadow the existing Derby to Birmingham line most of the way from Water Orton. I haven’t looked into it in any great depth but it might be possible to add a pair of leads connecting HS2 to the “classic” route in that area, although would it be worth the cost and the ensuing operational complexity? That section of line is already fairly busy, and suffers from congestion already at times.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Something like that is indeed intended; services from Edinburgh and Glasgow, joining the HS2 Phase 2 at Manchester Outskirts, and then running on to Birmingham.

Plus services from Newcastle joining HS2 Phase 2 south of Leeds, and again terminating in Brum.

Both allow use of the 'spare' capacity on Phase 2 North of the 'Y' junction.

Although to clarify, this won't quite be "Crosscountry" as we know it, as HS2 Phase 2 will only cater for the two Northern arms of the "X" network and won't do anything for the South West arm towards Bristol and the West Country from Birmingham, as Crosscountry services on HS2 will effectively "stop short" at Birmingham. That still covers Crosscountry journeys of a considerable length though, and if HS2 Phase 2 was open now it would do my regular travel patterns no end of good!

 

[nerd]

The HS2 branch into central Birmingham will shadow the existing Derby to Birmingham line most of the way from Water Orton. I haven’t looked into it in any great depth but it might be possible to add a pair of leads connecting HS2 to the “classic” route in that area, although would it be worth the cost and the ensuing operational complexity? That section of line is already fairly busy, and suffers from congestion already at times.

Indeed, linking into the existing cross-country lines north of Burm would be counter-productive. What would be needed would be a link around New Street that would allow trains from HS from Leeds/Newcastle or Manc/Glasgow to run through to Bristol without stopping at Brum.


Is there an underused or unused alignment handy, that anyone here knows of?

 

[Padav]

@swt_passenger: “There has never been any intention of publicly confirming the route in 2012, even though they'll haver a pretty good idea.”

I suppose your take on this depends on interpretation of the phrase "take on board local views"?

You posted a link to a document drawn from the DfT website

On that website is a page dedicated to a timeline of HS2 events
http://www.dft.gov.uk/topics/high-speed-rail/timeline
which shows;
Autumn 2012
• Agreed compensation policy in place
• Engagement programme along phase 2 (Leeds, Manchester and Heathrow) preferred route, to take on board local views

How is any programme of engagement along the phase 2 route going to take place if that route is not actually laid out for discussion (with "local views"), even if isn't actually a detailed map showing the precise layout down to the last millimetre - it will surely be a map illustrating a broadly preferred route and the location of all planned stations?

There will be only one (broadly) preferred route placed in the public domain - yes it will be subject to some minor revisions, arising from the programme of engagement described above but there will be no huge diversion from that initial preferred route.

When the phase 1 route was placed in the public domain the broad route had already been determined - yes, subsequently those other routes that made it to the shortlist were made public but the preferred Route3 option remained in situ, despite the best efforts of anti-HS2 campaigners to get it moved (anywhere would do!) It was the Route3 option that went to consultation (yes, it had been modified very slightly but it was still the same option)

I am convinced this same practice will be followed for phase 2 because it eliminates the malign influence of property blight from spreading too far and wide, thus motivating a larger cohort of antagonistic protest, which is just what you don't need. Those not in close proximity to the preferred (published) route breathe a sigh of relief and remain indifferent - those who are close to the route join campaign groups and sign petitions to their MP explaining why another (in fact, any other) route would be much better!

Even the SoS for Transport has indicated, on more than one occasion, that he will be publishing details of phase 2 in the not too distant future, for example this Telegraph article from 10th October;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...-HS2-rail-plans-Transport-Secretary-says.html
which states "He will also publish a route for the next stage of high-speed rail linking London and Manchester in the next few months, he said."

My best guess for the timing of that announcement is still (just) this side of Christmas, depending on the outcome (and timing of subsequent ruling) of the Judicial Review, scheduled for 3rd December

 

[nerd]

My best guess for the timing of that announcement is still (just) this side of Christmas, depending on the outcome (and timing of subsequent ruling) of the Judicial Review, scheduled for 3rd December

In principle, there is no connection between the Judicial Review (on the Phase 1 consultation and procedures); and the Phase 2 route announcement.

In practice, announcing the Phase 2 route after the Judicial Review could be tricky, if the review were to go against DfT. For which reason, I suspect that DfT will wish, if possible, to announce the Phase 2 route first.

 

[brianthegiant]

Its still coming to close to my house and I wont be able to use it without an hours journey into London!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But you are fortunate to already have a good rail service into Central London, with modern trains running twice an hour & 1 hour journey time. A key factor why Bucks is such an affluent area.

With the east west rail link you will also get improved connections to the midlands & north, which have always been lacking. In the 18 years living in Bucks I observed very little campaigning by Bucks for improved rail links like the East West project, except a token effort by Bucks CC in the last few years. This is in stark contrast to other areas where there are active groups campaigning for line & station re-openings.

Furthermore where were all the defenders of the Chilterns when the Wendover & Amersham bypasses were being built?

 

[Tim B]

Furthermore where were all the defenders of the Chilterns when the Wendover & Amersham bypasses were being built?

Quite - and that's without mentioning M40, original A41 by pass for Tring then A41 extension Cow Roast to Kings Langley + Aston Clinton bypass. Doubtless some people did complain at the time but I don't recall anything on the level of this orchestrated anti-HS2 campaign. :roll:

 

[MarkyT]

The opening of the second phase of HS2 can be expected to lead to widespread changes to the Crosscountry network in any case. . . . Crosscountry passengers from the North East to the South West using HS2 services from Edinburgh and Newcastle and then changing onto a regional service on the classic network at Birmingham.

Whilst significant numbers already change at Birmingham and elsewhere, surely the USP of XC services is the long distance through service. For those who already change again at each end of the long haul journey's extremities, the addition of a further change mid journey (with all the risks and anxieties of missed connections) for (perhaps) a theoretical 30 minute time saving on an 8 hour segment could be very unattractive and hand competing coach companies a gift-wrapped advantage on a plate.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Indeed, linking into the existing cross-country lines north of Burm would be counter-productive. What would be needed would be a link around New Street that would allow trains from HS from Leeds/Newcastle or Manc/Glasgow to run through to Bristol without stopping at Brum.

Stopping at Birmingham is an important element of frequent regular interval XC services with each service performing multiple functions. It would be possible for some trains to avoid Birmingham NS now using existing connections (as some summer saturday holiday trains used to do), but none do this. However using new HS tracks for XC services where the routes run broadly parallel could allow them to bypass congested areas and eventually some intermediate stations, such as Tamworth and Burton on Trent, releasing capacity in those bypassed areas for higher frequency and more reliable local services and freight. Obviously some new junctions would be required. Here are some ideas associated with Phase 1 - http://www.townend.me/files/hs2birmingham.pdf
Alternatively the Cross Country Link could be made via Lichfield - Alrewas - Wychnor Jn (note the line could be straightened near Alrewas without encroaching on the National Arboretum site)

 

[sprinterguy]

Whilst significant numbers already change at Birmingham and elsewhere, surely the USP of XC services is the long distance through service. For those who already change again at each end of the long haul journey's extremities, the addition of a further change mid journey (with all the risks and anxieties of missed connections) for (perhaps) a theoretical 30 minute time saving on an 8 hour segment could be very unattractive and hand competing coach companies a gift-wrapped advantage on a plate.

That is very true. I suppose it will depend on how much value the train operating companies at the time and the DfT place on those passengers who are willing to undertake a longer journey time to avoid having to change trains, compared to the potential to attract new passengers by accelerating journey times over sections of the "long haul" journey.

It is persistently claimed on this forum that very few passengers on Crosscountry services make the full end to end journey, although of course there will be some who do. Therefore restructuring the Crosscountry network into a group of shorter distance regional services is likely to inconvenience a comparatively small number of people, as I would fully expect some Crosscountry services that cross Birmingham to remain, but probably not reaching as far at the extremities.

 

[bangor-toad]

Is there an underused or unused alignment handy, that anyone here knows of?

There is an option that would allow a route with minimal engineering costs but would have the "minor" inconvienience of missing all the Birmingham stations...

HS2 comes into Birmingham past Washwood Heath and then will rise up over the existing tracks into the new Curzon Street terminus. It would be rather simple (in engineering terms) to build a grade seperated junction to allow access onto the Camp Hill line.
This would give access from all arms of HS2 to the SW routes towards Bristol, the West Country and South Wales.

So, the only costs would be additonal pointwork and all associated signalling works(!), upgrading of the Camp Hill line above arthritic snail linespeeds and electrifying the lot.
Actually seems pretty simple but the lack of a Birmingham stop must really wreck any business case...

Any better ideas?
Cheers,
Jason

 

[Kettledrum]

The opening of the second phase of HS2 can be expected to lead to widespread changes to the Crosscountry network in any case. I envisage that this will lead to the Crosscountry network being divided into a number of shorter distance regional services, with long distance Crosscountry passengers from the North East to the South West using HS2 services from Edinburgh and Newcastle and then changing onto a regional service on the classic network at Birmingham.

I totally disagree.

So many of the X country trains I see are full, so why sabotage a successful network of routes in this way?

High Speed trains from the North East will stop at very few stations anyway, so your plan won't pick up most of X country's existing passengers.

Those who are not left stranded at the existing stations will see any time saving evaporate by having to change trains at Birmingham.

Passengers will hate having to change trains at Birmingham.

Operationally, you don't want more X country trains to terminate at Birmingham New Street - you want the trains to be through trains so they need less platform dwell time and space.

There are no links planned to enable X country classic trains to run on the new HS line or vice versa.

So your "expectation" is based on what?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

...the potential to attract new passengers by accelerating journey times over sections of the "long haul" journey. .

Where are these "new passengers" going to come from?

From existing long haul journeys such as domestic flights?

- I can't see any time saving being sufficient to make people catch a train instead of a plane from say Newcastle or Scotland to Bristol or the South Coast - and the numbers would not outweigh the numbers of existing passengers you might lose.

From new commuter journeys?

- If you replace the existing cross country paths with more regional commuter paths, which new service patterns are you suggesting?

It would be better to make additional commuter paths available in other ways. In Birmingham for example, the Bordesley and Camp Hill chords could provide 3 new commuter routes into Moor Street with very little if any impact upon the existing X country paths and routes.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Stopping at Birmingham is an important element of frequent regular interval XC services with each service performing multiple functions. It would be possible for some trains to avoid Birmingham NS now using existing connections (as some summer saturday holiday trains used to do), but none do this.

Spend some time watching the X country trains at Birmingham New Street, and you'll see why no trains by-pass New Street any more. It's the businest station outside London with significant X country passengers getting on and off here. Rail Professionals have tried in the past to identify another station to act as a hub to encourage passengers to change trains elsewhere to relieve the pressure at Birmingham New Street, and have failed.

However using new HS tracks for XC services where the routes run broadly parallel could allow them to bypass congested areas and eventually some intermediate stations, such as Tamworth and Burton on Trent, releasing capacity in those bypassed areas for higher frequency and more reliable local services and freight.

Some XC trains do by-pass Burton-on-Trent and Tamworth, but don't forget Tamworth is a key junction where passengers can change for the West Coast Main line. There are a few other small stations on this route where the additional local services could stop - Willington, Wilnecote and Water Orton - and a new station could be built at the Fort Parkway, but the problem is the lack of capacity at Birmingham New Street. By-passing Tamworth or Burton won't really help - the planned solution was to build a new terminus platform at Tamworth and a chord to send the local trains into Moor Street instead, and leave the existing X country trains virtually unchanged - but the problem is a lack of funding.

As for freight, well the new Electric Spine might actually mean fewer freight paths are needed on this route.

Alternatively the Cross Country Link could be made via Lichfield - Alrewas - Wychnor Jn (note the line could be straightened near Alrewas without encroaching on the National Arboretum site)

Yes I've looked at this too, but not sure what the benefits are.

- and back on topic - is HS1 going to have any impact at all on any of the services on this stretch of line - I think not!

 

[sprinterguy]

So many of the X country trains I see are full, so why sabotage a successful network of routes in this way?

They are full with passengers that "turn over" at fairly frequent intervals for the most part, with a smaller number travelling distances over, say, three hours. The needs of the majority of Crosscountry's passengers would still be met by regional services covering their entire journey.

High Speed trains from the North East will stop at very few stations anyway, so your plan won't pick up most of X country's existing passengers.

The longer distance passengers from the likes of Edinburgh, Newcastle, York and Leeds to Birmingham can be expected to transfer onto High Speed 2 services for the most part, reducing the loadings on the "classic" Crosscountry services for passengers undertaking shorter distance journeys, such as Newcastle or York to Sheffield.

Those who are not left stranded at the existing stations will see any time saving evaporate by having to change trains at Birmingham.

Passengers will hate having to change trains at Birmingham.

Why would passengers be "stranded" anywhere? I would expect there to be a similar number of trains operating over the Crosscountry network to what we have now, but operating over shorter distances.

Operationally, you don't want more X country trains to terminate at Birmingham New Street - you want the trains to be through trains so they need less platform dwell time and space.

I have never said that I expected more Crosscountry trains would terminate at Birmingham New Street. I would still expect XC services to run through from one side of Birmingham to the other, but potentially to less distant extremities than at present.

So your "expectation" is based on what?

High Speed 2 can be expected to remove the longest distance passenger journeys from the "classic" Crosscountry services, between Edinburgh, Newcastle, York, Leeds and Birmingham. It will also increase the journey time benefit of travelling via London for cross country journeys from North East England, North West England and from the West Midlands towards South West England for those that are brave enough to make the cross-London interchange. There is already a high churn rate of passengers on Crosscountry services, and this will be accentuated by the removal of many of the longer distance passengers. Operating shorter distance journeys improves punctuality and journey time reliability, and reduces the complexity of train crew and rolling stock rostering. It might also lead to services that fit more neatly within the regionally driven franchise map.

Where are these "new passengers" going to come from?

From existing long haul journeys such as domestic flights?

From new commuter journeys?

No, from the private car. At present, journey times on Crosscountry services from Birmingham to York or Newcastle & Sunderland are comparable to those of the private car. I think that the train already just edges the advantage between Birmingham and York because of the difficulties and cost of car parking in York. Knock 45 minutes off the journey time for rail and it should persuade some motorists to at least make occasional journeys by rail on this corridor.

which new service patterns are you suggesting?

As a basic suggestion, I have considered four core services, with one train per hour operating on each one. These could consist of:

1. Glasgow to Nottingham via Edinburgh, Newcastle, York, Leeds and Derby.
2. York to Bristol and/or Cardiff via Doncaster and Birmingham
3. Manchester to Penzance via Birmingham and Bristol.
4. Manchester to Bournemouth via Birmingham and Reading.

Clearly the main corridor that is missing from this is some sort of service from the North East arm towards Oxford and Reading though.

 

[Padav]

@nerd:"In principle, there is no connection between the Judicial Review (on the Phase 1 consultation and procedures); and the Phase 2 route announcement.

In practice, announcing the Phase 2 route after the Judicial Review could be tricky, if the review were to go against DfT. For which reason, I suspect that DfT will wish, if possible, to announce the Phase 2 route first."

My view on this is exactly opposite to your conclusion.

Announcing the route beforehand only to discover that the entire timeline and process of HS2 is thrown into doubt WOULD prove tricky, which I why I believe the DfT will wait to discover what observations the Judicial Review throws up.

The underlying rationale of any Judicial Review process is to enable an independent overview of executive decision making to take place - just one of the checks and balances within a democratic state's constitutional framework in action to demonstrate the (theoretical) separation of powers between the Legislature, Executive and Judicial arms of government.

I believe that the Judicial Review will not throw up any fundamental obstacles to HS2 but it will oblige the govt to follow better procedures by recommending certain minor amendments - the anti-HS2 camp will of course sieze on any negative remarks in the court's summary as some kind of moral victory but I think such reactions will be shortlived and hollow. However, the DfT is wise to keep its hand close to its chest whilst it waits to see what key cards opponents have to play?

Either way, we won't have too long to wait to find out whose prediction proves more accurate - the Judicial Review hearing is set for 3rd December so that's barely more than 3 weeks from now?

 

[Kettledrum]

As a basic suggestion, I have considered four core services, with one train per hour operating on each one. These could consist of:

1. Glasgow to Nottingham via Edinburgh, Newcastle, York, Leeds and Derby.
2. York to Bristol and/or Cardiff via Doncaster and Birmingham
3. Manchester to Penzance via Birmingham and Bristol.
4. Manchester to Bournemouth via Birmingham and Reading.

Clearly the main corridor that is missing from this is some sort of service from the North East arm towards Oxford and Reading though.

Glasgow to Nottingham has been suggested as a potential open access route for a long time, but it's never got off the ground. If the East Coast arm of HS2 was fully built, you might be able to do almost all of this on brand new high speed tracks, and maintain the current X country network as it is.

I think there could be a new X country route from the NE to Bournemouth opening up once the electric spine gets built, and this would go through Oxford and Reading, but avoid Birmingham. Trains on this could run between 100 and 110 for long stretches - but don't think it would justify using new HS2 track for it because of the speed differentials.

Classic trains would be dangerously slow to be allowed to run at all on HS2, and the new HS trains would be wasted on any stretched of classic track - that's before you've dealt with any of the loading guage problems.

 

[brianthegiant]

Classic trains would be dangerously slow to be allowed to run at all on HS2, and the new HS trains would be wasted on any stretched of classic track - that's before you've dealt with any of the loading guage problems.

To clarify: the HS2 project includes provision for2 types of rolling stock:
(1) HS only stock (AGV/ICE or similar, ie standard european HS stock)
(2) 'classic compatible stock' would have similar power rating to (1) to fit paths but smaller loading gauge to run on classic lines, a bit like the Eurostar 373, but maybe even smaller for maximum flexibility.

I would assume anyone proposing routes using HS2 & classic lines are talking about stock type (2).
Only exception might be limited night time freight window, but this is narrow when you consider late night/early morning px and maintenance possession requirements, so this isn't mentioned much in any HS2 documentation.

 

[nerd]

My view on this is exactly opposite to your conclusion.

Announcing the route beforehand only to discover that the entire timeline and process of HS2 is thrown into doubt WOULD prove tricky, which I why I believe the DfT will wait to discover what observations the Judicial Review throws up.

The underlying rationale of any Judicial Review process is to enable an independent overview of executive decision making to take place - just one of the checks and balances within a democratic state's constitutional framework in action to demonstrate the (theoretical) separation of powers between the Legislature, Executive and Judicial arms of government.

I believe that the Judicial Review will not throw up any fundamental obstacles to HS2 but it will oblige the govt to follow better procedures by recommending certain minor amendments - the anti-HS2 camp will of course sieze on any negative remarks in the court's summary as some kind of moral victory but I think such reactions will be shortlived and hollow. However, the DfT is wise to keep its hand close to its chest whilst it waits to see what key cards opponents have to play?

Either way, we won't have too long to wait to find out whose prediction proves more accurate - the Judicial Review hearing is set for 3rd December so that's barely more than 3 weeks from now?

as you say; we will know soon.

The rationales for announcing the Phase 2 route before the judicial review hearing are:

- that nothing in the Phase 2 report can be changed by any ruling on judicial review, it may as well come out now;
- that the courts do not adhered to administrative time-scales, it is quite possible that any ruling will be deferred;
- that, if the rulilng goes against DfT, this potentially undermines the Phase 2 announcement, anti objectors will demand that the Phase 2 report is suspended. There will be no justification for this; but it could still creates an unnecessary PR problem.


But then, since in any case ministers will have to wait on Transport Scotland's say-so; they may have no choice.


-
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

High speed rail link plans between Edinburgh and Glasgow unveiled It is hoped that the high speed link will reduce the journey time to less than half an hour

Plans for a high speed rail link between Glasgow and Edinburgh which would cut journey times to less than half and hour were unveiled by Nicola Sturgeon today.

The SNP Government wants to have the faster link running within 12 years – a least a decade ahead of the current proposals to extend high speed rail north of the border from London.

Ms Sturgeon announced the plans as she prepared to head up a delegation of politicians and rail industry experts from throughout Britain and Europe calling on the Westminster government to involve the whole country in HS2 from the outset. National transport agency Transport Scotland has been investigating how quickly it would be possible establish such a link between Scotland’s two biggest cities.

“We now know that within just 12 years, we could build a line which will see journey times between our two major cities cut to less than half an hour,” Ms Sturgeon said in Glasgow today.

“That will benefit our businesses, our jobs market and also our tourism industry. And it will put us up there with the world’s greatest transport networks.

“We will not wait for Westminster to bring high speed rail to us. We have already made moves towards seeing a high speed line in Scotland and the evidence is now in place that this is feasible long before the HS2 proposals.”

The current plans UK plans for high speed rail will see a London-Birmingham completed by 2026 after being given the green light by UK ministers at the start of this year. But it will be several years later before the line is extended up to Scotland.

Ms Sturgeon added: “The Scottish Government will now enter into talks with our partners in both cities and the rail industry to see how we can work together to see this vision realised – a Glasgow-Edinburgh high speed line which can connect to the network from England.”

The Department for Transport has so far only revealed plans to see the new high speed line go from London to Birmingham and then Manchester and Leeds by 2033, although Secretary of State for Transport Patrick McLoughlin has agreed to continue talks to involve Scotland at some stage. Transport Minister Keith Brown will meet him in the coming weeks to agree a shared approach going forward.

The Fast Track Scotland report was produced last year and found that a high speed line from London would benefit Scotland to the tune of around £24.8billion. The document also found that almost three quarters of Scottish businesses believe high speed rail would attract new investment to Scotland.

A two-day conference is taking place in Glasgow this week bringing together representatives from across the political spectrum, commerce, industry and academia to discuss the benefits of extending the HS2 line beyond the current plans.

Speakers will include Ms Sturgeon, Transport Minister Keith Brown and Westminster Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Transport Norman Baker.

This is the immanent HS2 route announcement, spun from an SNP perspective.

The key is the end; a joint presentation by Transport Scotland and DfT (in its Lib Dem side) to this HS2 conference in Glasgow. I expect this to launch what McLoughlin was referring to as the joint Phase 3 study. It will then be possible for McLoughlin to announce the Phase 2 route within England.

The key unresolved issue is Westminster finance - which McLoughlin has no control over. The SNP want a Westminster commitment to fund an Edinburgh-Glasgow high speed link (outside the Barnet formula), as the Scots end of the GB High Speed Rail network; and they want agreement from the UK Treasury that this can go ahead soon after 2016.

But in the meanwhile; I expect that all sides will want the Phase 2 route announced as soon as possible.

 

[dggar]

Posted on Rail News today

http://www.railnews.co.uk/news/2012/11/12-design-panel-set-to-advise.html

THE FINAL ROUTE of the first phase of HS2 is to be guided by the views of an expert design panel, it is reported.

The transport secretary is due to announce tomorrow that the route of the High Speed line between London, Birmingham, Manchester and Leeds will 'respect' rural areas. His move is thought to be a bid to mollify opponents of the project ahead of December's judicial review in the High Court.

Patrick McLoughlin is set to unveil his new design panel when he makes a speech to the Campaign to Protect Rural England tomorrow.

He is expected to say that: “I’m particularly keen to ensure high quality design for structures along the HS2 route – and to give communities confidence that they will be as sensitive as possible to the character of their setting,” according to the Financial Times.

A High Court judge has set aside eight days for the judicial review, which will start on 3 December. The cases are being brought by the HS2 Action Alliance along with 51M, Heathrow Hub and Aylesbury Golf Club.

Some costs will be capped, and there could be further claims to come. The court will consider whether former transport secretary Justine Greening acted lawfully when she approved HS2 in January this year, and part of the argument will be based on the fact that some responses to last year's consultation were overlooked.

According to the HS2 Action Alliance 'the secretary of state has been required to provide a full explanation for what happened'

 

[Haydn1971]

Newby on here, but some of you might recognise my name from a roads forum though. Noticed a thread about HS2 in Leeds, but has there been a similar discussion about Sheffield ?

I'm currently aware of the HS2 mega thread, which confirms my thoughts on the three most realistic options.
1st most likely - Meadowhall likely as a through station, but also possibly a terminus on a spur
2nd most likely - Nunnery as a terminus on a spur
3rd most likely - City Centre, either as a north south through station (lots of tunnel) or more likely as a terminus (although again, where you would fit a 4, even 2 platform station that accomodates 400m long trains is the big question.

Anyone drawn any possible options up ?

 

[YorkshireBear]

Meadowhall, sited on the North side of tinsley viaduct is my solution. With a raised walkway with travelators on linking into meadowhall interchange. Line here runs parrallel with viaduct before station and follows M1 to junction 35.

Thats my proposal for my uni work that i did anyway. I think it has been almost confirmed meadowhall is the site of choice.

 

[Haydn1971]

North side ? I'm guessing you mean northern end ? On the western side of the viaduct ?

 

[tbtc]

Meadowhall would be fine - linking with the nine trains an hour to Sheffield Midland and eight trams an hour to Sheffield Cathedral (both based on current frequencies)/ M1 etc.

A stand alone HS2 station may be a bit of a white elephant... Victoria would be isolated from other trains/ trams... Nunnery Square is a distance out of town... any station that isn't on the main HS2 line from London/ Birmingham to Leeds/ Newcastle would presumably get a low fewer trains than one on the main line alignment (i.e. Meadowhall)... no space at Sheffield Midland for 400m trains or any fast running... sadly Sheffield's business market doesn't have the kind of national importance to justify a complicated solution... just a few thoughts.

 

[YorkshireBear]

North side ? I'm guessing you mean northern end ? On the western side of the viaduct ?

Yeah sorry, south of the M1 at western end of viaduct. Wasnt clear at all.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'm actually a fan of the Meadowhall "Parkway" through solution, with some line speed improvements on the Sheffield-Rotherham-Doncaster line, it would have great linkage. Now can we get the line in now rather than in 20 years as I catch the train daily from Meadowhall to Leeds and point to point, the express train speed is a bit of a joke... Mmmmm.... Straight flat line would be lovely for getting to work

 

[YorkshireBear]

I'm actually a fan of the Meadowhall "Parkway" through solution, with some line speed improvements on the Sheffield-Rotherham-Doncaster line, it would have great linkage. Now can we get the line in now rather than in 20 years as I catch the train daily from Meadowhall to Leeds and point to point, the express train speed is a bit of a joke... Mmmmm.... Straight flat line would be lovely for getting to work

You should see some improvements in next 8 years, Network rail are doing some speeds improvements around Horbury, Wakefield Kirkgate and Normanton.

 

[Haydn1971]

8 years seems a long time away too ! Any substantive details ? Rail or LTP funded ?

Going a bit mad hatter, I worked on some very early plans for a eastern IRR route around the back of Midland Station back in about 1993, it seems to me that if the HS line was to go through the centre, the strip of land to the east of the existing station is the only half logical and big enough location - heading south into a tunnel under Heeley then through Gleadless Valley and north on a viaduct over Park Square and the Canal Basin then dropping into a tunnel under Burngreave, popping up somewhere north, perhaps taking a few houses out through Parson Cross etc... Essentially a straight line alignment with a through line and two platforms for say 2tph

Essentially a much more costly option for not that much of a gain to Sheffield - the local members all seem keen on Victoria as a location, but the corridor just doesn't line up for a route between Leeds and the East Midlands - unless of course Sheffield is on a spur, which as said above, hasn't really the demand to justify.

The Meadowhall option puts my house within a mile of a probable line past Rother Valley though - I can hear the trains at night on the lines down there, I'm sure something passing at 320-360kph will be a tad noisier !
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Appears to be a lot less interest in the Sheffield route against options for Leeds :-/ no other thoughts to throw into the mix ?

 

[YorkshireBear]

I imagine its just improving the incredibly slow sections in all those areas with very slow junctions etc where time is lost regularly.

Problem is Leeds is a lot bigger then sheffield so it gets discussed far more. (im from sheffield and it pains me)

 

[Haydn1971]

To be fair, Sheffield wasn't that significant when rail was being developed, I've never had much interest until the HS2 developments and in particular only in the last couple of years since I started using rail a number of times a week.

I do believe that the 4-5 years of roadwork hell that starts on the M1 in January will feed a significant passenger increase on the Sheffield - Barnsley - Leeds route. The bottom car park at Meadowhall station is looking almost full by 7am and the top one a non starter after 7:30am, I suspect this will drift to an earlier timeframe in the next six months as people tire of the hassle on the M1