How to increase capacity on the Birmingham-Derby line

[Bald Rick]

It just depends whether you could get a non stop path for a Voyager up the Cross City line to Lichfield and beyond.

You can easily get a path for a Cross Country service Birmingham - Lichfield - Burton that doesn’t call anywhere intermediately.

It will take approximately the same time as a cross City service from Birmingham - Lichfield, then trundle on to Burton at the low speed limit beyond. Unlikley to be much less than 50-55 minutes.

 

[Sonik]

That's a somewhat different scenario though as it relies on HS2 reaching Manchester. Which means building a lot more than the Derby line connection.

In time do both, then you get better inter-regional connectivity, as well as more services to London.

I always thought that HS2 had too many termini and the way to reach Leeds was by making Manchester a through station and heading east from there.

Totally agree, putting more stops in line not only provides better regional connections, it fills up trains because you have a wider catchment

(Albeit I think a turn back is OK on a short spur, it's the through connectivity that matters)

The original HS2 eastern leg design was a joke from a service pattern perspective

 

[HSTEd]

I always thought that HS2 had too many termini and the way to reach Leeds was by making Manchester a through station and heading east from there.

I think the Y network was primarily a result of looking at urban light pollution, as seen here.

The problem with that view is that HS2 isn't really a continuous route like a motorway or (to a much lesser degree) a Shinkansen.
Its a series of jumps with no interaction with the local population between point connections.

Even before Meadowhall got ditched, the economics of building that expanse of track for Leeds seemed dodgy.
Without Meadowhall you end up building from Chesterfield to Leeds solely for Leeds traffic, and I'd argue any case for the Y disintegrates.

 

[FMerrymon]

I think the Y network was primarily a result of looking at urban light pollution, as seen here.

The problem with that view is that HS2 isn't really a continuous route like a motorway or (to a much lesser degree) a Shinkansen.
Its a series of jumps with no interaction with the local population between point connections.

Even before Meadowhall got ditched, the economics of building that expanse of track for Leeds seemed dodgy.
Without Meadowhall you end up building from Chesterfield to Leeds solely for Leeds traffic, and I'd argue any case for the Y disintegrates.

Not solely for Leeds traffic: York, Durham, Darlington, Newcastle too, whilst bypassing the East Coast mainline and most of the cross country route so that the intermediate stations on those lines are served better.

One of the reasons they switched from. Meadowhall was that the NPR plan was to go to the centre of Sheffield and would have joined hs2 for it's fast part of the run. It would have therefore had at least 4 trains an hour sheffield-leeds/york.

 

[HSTEd]

Not solely for Leeds traffic: York, Durham, Darlington, Newcastle too, whilst bypassing the East Coast mainline and most of the cross country route so that the intermediate stations on those lines are served better.

In order to get that traffic you have to build even more trackage bypassing Leeds using the Y solution, and that much track gets you from Leeds to York in a "via Manchester" solution.

Including it doesn't help the Y versus the "via Manchester" solution

ie. Manchester-York via Leeds is a significantly shorter segment than south of Chesterfield-Leeds and somewhere south of Leeds-York.

One of the reasons they switched from. Meadowhall was that the NPR plan was to go to the centre of Sheffield and would have joined hs2 for it's fast part of the run. It would have therefore had at least 4 trains an hour sheffield-leeds/york.

There was no concrete planning for any of that, it was just a vague hope, without any funding or proper planning at all.

My own cynical view, at the time, was that Sheffield City Council was more concerned with preserving the preeminance of Sheffield in South Yorkshire than with improving the region's economic position.
Meadowhall would have weakened that preeminance, and thus they opposed it.

 

[Zomboid]

Based on 67 minutes for London - Manchester, I don't think that York - Leeds - Manchester - London via HS2 would have been much faster (if at all) than York- London via the ECML, but I also don't think it would have been any slower, so would have allowed Newcastle etc to be served without detriment and whilst relieving the southern ECML.

 

[HSTEd]

Based on 67 minutes for London - Manchester, I don't think that York - Leeds - Manchester - London via HS2 would have been much faster (if at all) than York- London via the ECML, but I also don't think it would have been any slower, so would have allowed Newcastle etc to be served without detriment and whilst relieving the southern ECML.

I tried to do the calculation and came to the conclusion it would be more or less a dead heat with the ECML's fastest trains.

It does amalgamate loads to an enormous degree though, London-Manchester-Leeds-York-Newcastle trains can probably justify running at quite a substantial frequency!

Indeed I think Birmingham International would probably be a popular stop on such a train if it was running at quite high frequency, arguably six trains per hour could be justified, at least to York.
However, all of this is rather wandering from the topic!

 

[Mitchell Hurd]

Not necessariily.

I think the easiest way to improve times to Leeds is to build HS2 to Manchester, and continue to Leeds via the upgraded Transpennine route.

HS2 claim 67 minutes Euston-Manchester. Allowing say 4 minutes to reverse at HS2 Piccadilly and 41 minutes for Manchester-Leeds gives 1h52m Euston-Leeds, compared to 2h13m via the ECML today. And it's only 1h44m Leeds-OOC if heading to Heathrow.

Sending London-Leeds via HS2 should bring real relief to the ECML.

I think you'd need around 10 minutes for a big train to reverse instead of 4 minutes.

 

[StewLane]

Euston is not where I and many others want to go in London. Any time saving to London from Derby is lost when I then have to get to St Pancras for Eurostar or HS1 to Kent.
Derby/Nottingham and Leicester still need MML fast services to London.

I think we are forgetting that HS2 was about relieving the WCML. Taking on services to Sheffield Leeds and York was about avoiding another HS line to relieve the ECML and saving money

 

[The Planner]

Euston is not where I and many others want to go in London. Any time saving to London from Derby is lost when I then have to get to St Pancras for Eurostar or HS1 to Kent.
Derby/Nottingham and Leicester still need MML fast services to London.

I think we are forgetting that HS2 was about relieving the WCML. Taking on services to Sheffield Leeds and York was about avoiding another HS line to relieve the ECML and saving money

They would still have them. Also, not everyone is getting on HS1 and why build two lines if one can do the job?

 

[Zomboid]

Euston is not where I and many others want to go in London. Any time saving to London from Derby is lost when I then have to get to St Pancras for Eurostar or HS1 to Kent.
Derby/Nottingham and Leicester still need MML fast services to London.

Not everyone is going to St Pancras, either.
What I would envisage would be a 2tph service from Sheffield (maybe originating in Leeds) via HS2, but retaining a service via Leicester as not everyone is going to London.

 

[cle]

Leicester will needs its fast services and will never be on HS anything.

Nottingham probably doesn’t need 4tph but may get them out of necessity. But otherwise, I would think a St P - Bedford - Leicester and main station service to Sheffield would be useful. Assuming Derby / Chesterfield / Sheffield traffic switched to HS2.

Or a Sheffield - Derby - Leicester local / on to Nuneaton and Brum or Coventry.

Also if some Sheffield / ECML (assuming wires to Donny) faster service started at Curzon, you could at least up calls at Tamworth and Burton to all XC services.

Both would give a big more regional connectivity and enable HS2 to run more skip / p2p

 

[Bald Rick]

Euston is not where I and many others want to go in London. Any time saving to London from Derby is lost when I then have to get to St Pancras for Eurostar or HS1 to Kent.

Sigh, but it’s not all about your travel needs. It is about all those travelling from the East Midlands to the London area. Almost all of whom are *not* going to Kent or the continent.

 

[Brubulus]

Leicester will needs its fast services and will never be on HS anything.

Nottingham probably doesn’t need 4tph but may get them out of necessity. But otherwise, I would think a St P - Bedford - Leicester and main station service to Sheffield would be useful. Assuming Derby / Chesterfield / Sheffield traffic switched to HS2.

Or a Sheffield - Derby - Leicester local / on to Nuneaton and Brum or Coventry.

Also if some Sheffield / ECML (assuming wires to Donny) faster service started at Curzon, you could at least up calls at Tamworth and Burton to all XC services.

Both would give a big more regional connectivity and enable HS2 to run more skip / p2p

What I would like to see in terms of long distance services on the MML 2tph to Nottingham, first stop Leicester, then 2tph semi-fast, 1tph each to Nottingham and Derby.

HS2 will run 2tph, both to Sheffield since I believe trying to run a service to Leeds is a poor use of limited capacity between Sheffield and Leeds, when running 2tph to Birmingham is more important. These would call at Burton or Chesterfield.

There would then be 2 fast tph from Birmingham-Nottingham (Calling at Tamworth and Burton), potentially using HS2 even though I'd rather use 110mph EMUs, potentially via Castle Dorrington.

There would also be an hourly slow to Derby, alongside 3 XC tph between Birmingham and Sheffield, with each one stopping at one of Tamworth, Burton and Chesterfield, and all stopping at Derby)

This should all just about fit together, with resignalling to ETCS alongside electrification and a very limited remodelling of Burton.

 

[Zomboid]

What I would like to see in terms of long distance services on the MML 2tph to Nottingham, first stop Leicester, then 2tph semi-fast, 1tph each to Nottingham and Derby

Ideally that Derby train would be able to carry on to Sheffield, but I would think that's about the right concept for the remaining MML service.

HS2 trains would in my mind be 2tph calling at Sheffield, Chesterfield, Derby and alternate between Burton & Tamworth. I don't know whether Interchange would add a lot of value if the XC service continues to run into Birmingham.

 

[Nottingham59]

What I would like to see in terms of long distance services on the MML 2tph to Nottingham, first stop Leicester, then 2tph semi-fast, 1tph each to Nottingham and Derby.

That's just my thinking: 3tph to Nottingham, 1tph to Derby (+HS2) gives an improved frequency to London for both cities.

HS2 will run 2tph, both to Sheffield since I believe trying to run a service to Leeds is a poor use of limited capacity between Sheffield and Leeds, when running 2tph to Birmingham is more important. These would call at Burton or Chesterfield.

Maybe Chesterfield? HS2 trains are only 110mph on the classic network, so liable to be caught by 125mph XC Voyagers from the South West. Giving the Burton calls to XC would reduce speed differentials. I think it would be possible to extend platforms at Derby, Chesterfield and Sheffield to make these services 400m, if there was demand.

There would then be 2 fast tph from Birmingham-Nottingham (Calling at Tamworth and Burton), potentially using HS2 even though I'd rather use 110mph EMUs, potentially via Castle Dorrington.

The short length of HS2 from Delta North junction to Curzon St is limited to 230kph, and not that heavily used. So it may be possible to run 125mph Classic stock with ETCS on that section of HS2 without too much trouble. I understand HS2 is planning not to use all seven platforms at Curzon St, so fitting two of them out as classic NR platforms should be possible. This would relieve lots of capacity to New St at very little extra cost.

Alternatively, Curzon St-Sheffield could run as extensions to London-Curzon St trains, giving a slower route from London to Sheffield for the price-senstive segment the market, like Avanti do to Glasgow via Birmingham.

There would also be an hourly slow to Derby, alongside 3 XC tph between Birmingham and Sheffield, with each one stopping at one of Tamworth, Burton and Chesterfield, and all stopping at Derby)

This should all just about fit together, with resignalling to ETCS alongside electrification and a very limited remodelling of Burton.

 

[Zomboid]

Maybe Chesterfield? HS2 trains are only 110mph on the classic network, so

Why would that be the case? They might not tilt so won't be doing EPS speeds on the WCML, but they ought to be able to do 125 where that's the regular line speed

 

[Nottingham59]

Why would that be the case? They might not tilt so won't be doing EPS speeds on the WCML, but they ought to be able to do 125 where that's the regular line speed

I thought HS2 trains were limited to 110mph on the CRN, but I see that's only the case on WCML curves. So forget that.

 

[StewLane]

Sigh, but it’s not all about your travel needs. It is about all those travelling from the East Midlands to the London area. Almost all of whom are *not* going to Kent or the continent.

So 6 tube lines, multiple Thameslink destinations, HS1, Eurostar and the British Library are not enough reasons that St Pancras is a better destination than Euston with just 2 tube lines (another 2 if you leave the station and walk up the Euston Road)?

I still maintain the connection to East Midlands is not to serve either Derby or Nottingham but is merely to avoid serving the east coast directly.

The main need was to provide capacity for the WCML and HS 2 in its current form will not satisfy that need

 

[FMerrymon]

So 6 tube lines, multiple Thameslink destinations, HS1, Eurostar and the British Library are not enough reasons that St Pancras is a better destination than Euston with just 2 tube lines (another 2 if you leave the station and walk up the Euston Road)?

I still maintain the connection to East Midlands (not to serve either Derby or Nottingham) is merely to avoid serving the east coast directly.

The main need was to provide capacity for the WCML and HS 2 in its current form will not satisfy that need

They were to become one station with crossrail 2. It would make sense to improve the connection between them for pedestrians wothiut having to come out of the station for when hs2 opens.

In some of the post hs2 phase2b plans, prior to IRP, Nottingham would have been served additionally from Kings Cross via Grantham.

 

[Zomboid]

Euston is all of an 8 minute walk (according to Google) from St Pancras. And if you include Euston Square it has most of the same tube lines as St Pancras (including both branches of the Northern, you only get the bank branch at St Pancras - you effectively swap the Piccadilly for the Charing Cross branch). I'll give you Thameslink, but via HS2 you'd get Crossrail and faster Heathrow access at OOC.

But don't worry, this is a bunch of people with no actual influence chatting rubbish that'll never happen, so your slow journeys on maxed out infrastructure are safe.

 

[HSTEd]

So 6 tube lines, multiple Thameslink destinations, HS1, Eurostar and the British Library are not enough reasons that St Pancras is a better destination than Euston with just 2 tube lines (another 2 if you leave the station and walk up the Euston Road)?

I'm, not sure that's fair assessment.

King's Cross has five and a half tube lines (it's only got one arm of the Northern line), Thameslink and HS1.

Euston gets two, plus three more at Euston Square.
But obviously, via HS2 gets you Crossrail at Old Oak too.

 

[Sonik]

HS2 running time to Rugeley North junction is 47 minutes from Euston (40 minutes from OOC). Assuming the same time to get to Kingsbury on the Eastern stump

To the end of 'Kingsbury stump' I'd use the HS2 timing to Curzon St, it's about the same distance.

With the huge cost of the fully separated delta junction (which has not been de-scoped) it makes sense to make use of it. So I do find it interesting that government announced Bodersly chords on the west/south side only, because it would be possible to split north and south XC services between Moor St and Curzon with a walkable connection. OOC to East Midlands and Yorkshire would also be possible

There is IMO huge scope for capacity & speed enhancements in the MML corridor, using various routes. Doing this is not only surely much cheaper than building the full eastern leg, but in many cases it can improve regional connectivity much more so than the original HS2 plan. This will help greatly in tipping the ratio in BCRs.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: Wednesday at 12:20 ==

Not convinced you need grade seperation of Stenson unless you are throwing loads towards Nottingham whereupon Sheet Stores and Trent become problematic.

Unless you swing the Donnington line to connect directly with MML south of EMP, an idea that's been repeatedly floated. Bingo, 'HS2' to Notts.

But more importantly, it would leave the Spondon route & Trent Junctions largely free for improved local services. EMP and Stenson both then also become extraordinarily well connected potential hub stations, adjacent to huge brownfeild sites i.e. great places for new towns, development of which can help pay for rail upgrades.

 

[The Planner]

Unless you swing the Donnington line to connect directly with MML south of EMP, an idea that's been repeatedly floated. Bingo, 'HS2' to Notts.

But more importantly, it would leave the Spondon route & Trent Junctions largely free for improved local services. EMP and Stenson both then also become extraordinarily well connected potential hub stations, adjacent to huge brownfeild sites i.e. great places for new towns, development of which can help pay for rail upgrades.

That is a very big and expensive project to do unless you are throwing a lot of trains at it.

 

[Sonik]

That is a very big and expensive project to do unless you are throwing a lot of trains at it.

Sure, but BCRs do also tend to look at wider effects, including housing development (which can make a contribution) and knock on benefits to services elsewhere. That's how the hugely expensive Crossrail got built.

 

[The Planner]

Sure, but BCRs do also tend to look at wider effects, including housing development (which can make a contribution) and knock on benefits to services elsewhere. That's how the hugely expensive Crossrail got built.

I know how BCRs work, but even the report on this solution was so high level I am not convinced it believed it itself.

 

[Brubulus]

I cant really see the argument for sending HS2 trains to Notts, given that will become very expensive, very quickly for very little journey time or capacity benefit. The Castle Donnington line would however be useful for shortening Birmingham-Nottingham journeys, meaning that they would be under an hour post electrification. Under no circumstances can I see more than 2tph using the line.

 

[HSTEd]

I cant really see the argument for sending HS2 trains to Notts, given that will become very expensive, very quickly for very little journey time or capacity benefit. The Castle Donnington line would however be useful for shortening Birmingham-Nottingham journeys, meaning that they would be under an hour post electrification. Under no circumstances can I see more than 2tph using the line.

Well the capacity benefit of connecting HS2 to the line would be shifting passengers out of a St Pancras that probably has too many passengers in too small a station

 

[Brubulus]

Well the capacity benefit of connecting HS2 to the line would be shifting passengers out of a St Pancras that probably has too many passengers in too small a station

Once HS2 is done (with a hypothetical link)there will only be the Connect trains and a GA style semi-intercity service to Nottingham. You'll still need to run relatively fast trains to Leicester and putting 2 more tph on Birmingham-Derby will make the upgrade even more expensive given it will require ever more expensive infrastructure interventions.

 

[cle]

Once HS2 is done there will only be the Connect trains and a GA style semi-intercity service to Nottingham. You'll still need to run relatively fast trains to Leicester and putting 2 more tph on Birmingham-Derby will make the upgrade even more expensive given it will require ever more expensive infrastructure interventions.

If Derby and Sheffield run via HS2, then St Pancras is ostensibly for Corby, Leicester and Nottingham - and stations on those routes. It's really not much - they'd have St Pancras upper level to themselves.

But if 6tph are still available, it's likely that a connector service to at least Derby will be kept (does Leicester need a Sheffield service really? It doesn't have Manchester or Leeds) - - - - or more calls at Bedford are possible.

There is no case for Nottingham services via HS2 (people suggest them via ECML too!) - I'm sure they'd end up with 3tph at least. 1tph should call Leicester only - and try get to that 90min journey.