The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,971
It isnt 18tph to Birmingham.
18 trains per hour is the eventual total between London and Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle, Glasgow, Edinburgh and possibly other places I've forgotten about.That is how physics works - the laws of same are immutable - regardless of DfT notions. I still struggle with the 18 trains p.hour to Brum - why? To have that capacity is fine but, when passenger figures have started to drift off in the SE..... Could there really be a max. demand of some 18k people p.hour to Brum and back?
The simple kinetic energy equation: K.E. = 1/2×m×v^2 shows that at 320km/h, assuming constant m, the energy requirement is approximately 14% higher than at 300km/h. Considering that wind resistance is also a square function of the speed (velocity), this too is approximately 14% higher at 320km/h.
So whilst twice the energy is probably an overstatement, it would not be unreasonable to think that a 50% or greater increase in input energy would be required to attain 320km/h.
18 trains per hour is the eventual total between London and Birmingham, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle, Glasgow, Edinburgh and possibly other places I've forgotten about.
Stockport won't, the only reason Macclesfield is on there is that its assumed you cannot get across Cheadle Hulme. Would be very surprised to see Blackpool too.
There is no reason to put a high speed train into stockport, the bulk of Stockport traffic will be eaten up by the Airport I would exepct.
Again it's a case of an easy extension of a classic set from Macclesfield for minimal cost gaining maximum political benefit. I don't think it will be in the business case but it's the sort of thing that could easily be added once the initial service is up and running.
Problem is Stockport Terminators might not go down well in terms of platform usage, and running through to Picadilly will likely be scotched - local services are already being lined up for the paths through Stockport after all.
Again it's a case of an easy extension of a classic set from Macclesfield for minimal cost gaining maximum political benefit. I don't think it will be in the business case but it's the sort of thing that could easily be added once the initial service is up and running.
I'd also suggest a fast free shuttle lift connection between Stockport's rail and bus station levels, perhaps using some kind of rubber tyred autonomous pod technology rather than a traditional funicular or sloped elevator, but largely on dedicated lane as far as possible to ensure speed and priority while also allowing space sharing at crossings with pedestrians where expedient. A single lane 'virtual funicular' on rubber tyres with two reversible midi bus sized cars and a passing loop in the middle, or a larger number of smaller cars cycling on demand more frequently when required on a continuous narrow one way loop like Ultra at Heathrow.
Can you please substantiate your assertion that I've bolded and italicised above? A valid hyperlink to your source could make the statement credible.
Therefore based on aerodynamic drag alone, at 300kph, the power consumption will be ~37% higher than at 270kph. At 320kph, the power consumption is ~66% higher than at 270kph, and ~21% higher than at 300kph.
HS2 should definitely have London calls at Carlisle, without a doubt.Carstairs, Darlington, York, Sheffield, Chesterfield, East Midlands Interchange, Preston, Wigan North Western, Warrington Bank Quay, Runcorn, Manchester Airport, Crewe, Stafford, Birmingham Interchange on the latest published business case.
Motherwell, Lockerbie, Carlisle, Penrith, Oxenholme, Lancaster and Durham have Birmingham services in the latest business case but no London calls.
Probably London services from Carlisle (replacing Carstairs), Stoke , Macclesfield will be added in the next iteration of the business case.
Eventually I'd not be surprised to see Stockport, Lancaster, Blackpool North, Durham and Northallerton added to the list of places receiving HS2 London bound calls in Phase 2B once the detailed service specification is developed.
Only if the time taken by adding a call doesn't lengthen the journey time by more than the time taken to connect at Preston.HS2 should definitely have London calls at Carlisle, without a doubt.
Power consumption is however irrelevant.
Energy consumption is.
Energy consumed is proportional to the square, not the cube, because by doubling the velocity I half the time I must sustain the force against air resistance, since i will reach the destination in half the time.
Only if the time taken by adding a call doesn't lengthen the journey time by more than the time taken to connect at Preston.
Only if the time taken by adding a call doesn't lengthen the journey time by more than the time taken to connect at Preston.
I meant passengers making a connection from a local/slow train to HS2 at Preston, rather than splitting/joining.Splitting / Joining at Preston is not on the agenda. There simply isn't enough capacity on the WCML over Shap to allow it.
I meant passengers making a connection from a local/slow train to HS2 at Preston, rather than splitting/joining.
A somewhat belated reply, sorry - the link to not viewed links just popped up. I note the link above still shows services from Heathrow (when?) - ignoring that minor bit the proposal looks sort of possible. I still have concerns about demand though. Not only demand but, of more interest, pricing. Also, as with AVE, TGV, do/will seats have to be reserved in advance? The loss of turn up and go as a result of the high speed - the HS1 395s are nippy at up to 140, but perfectly open and not exactly 'high speed'. Having said that, I was on a double-set TGV from Avignon Centre to Lille a few years ago - rear set oou already (where my seat was meant to be) - grabbed a seat in the front set until Lyon PD and then it was full and standing from then on. Me and about ten others in a vestibule at 300 kph.I still struggle with the 18 trains p.hour to Brum - why? (wychood93)
It's 18 trains per hour leaving London, about three or four to Birmingham. The rest go on to northern England via the two branches.
https://assets.publishing.service.g...on_of_the_service_patterns__January_2013_.pdf
A somewhat belated reply, sorry - the link to not viewed links just popped up. I note the link above still shows services from Heathrow (when?) - ignoring that minor bit the proposal looks sort of possible. I still have concerns about demand though. Not only demand but, of more interest, pricing. Also, as with AVE, TGV, do/will seats have to be reserved in advance? The loss of turn up and go as a result of the high speed - the HS1 395s are nippy at up to 140, but perfectly open and not exactly 'high speed'. Having said that, I was on a double-set TGV from Avignon Centre to Lille a few years ago - rear set oou already (where my seat was meant to be) - grabbed a seat in the front set until Lyon PD and then it was full and standing from then on. Me and about ten others in a vestibule at 300 kph.
That's going to be interesting once the services run onto the mainlines, where people currently enjoy turn-up and go frequencies. I can't imagine that the railway would be happy with the reduced capacity by not allowing people to stand.I cannot cite a reference, but I recall HS2 saying the intent is that all passengers will be in a "booked in advance" seat so no-one should be standing anywhere. "In Advance" could be as late as a few minutes before departure, (via screens, phone apps, etc.) but essentially you won't be sold a ticket unless there's a seat to sit in. Essentially, it's an "airline" style model instead of the "tube/rail" model we are used to in the UK.
None of that is decided, Preston isn't binned and there is no timetable yet that says there is not enough capacity over Shap either.Splitting / Joining at Preston is not on the agenda. There simply isn't enough capacity on the WCML over Shap to allow it.
There are broadly three options.
Carstairs
Carlisle
No splitting
Within that there are some sub options like having a split at Carstairs but without a passenger call there and the no splitting has East and West coast options for serving Edinburgh.
I think Carstairs is the least likely to happen with no split vs Carlisle being finely balanced.
None of that is decided, Preston isn't binned and there is no timetable yet that says there is not enough capacity over Shap either.