Curzon Street HS2 Railway Station

Austriantrain said:

Since this does not make any sense from where I come from, is there any logical reason for this, apart from the fact that obviously not all connecting lines are electrified (which could be changed, of course).

Click to expand...

Absence of a 300+km/h capable electrodiesel train anywhere in the world.
Best available is currently onl 250km/h, which is probably too slow even for the Birmingham-Manchester/Leeds sections of HS2.

Electrification would be a huge project because it would mean effectively going at least all the way to plymouth and probably penzance.

We can however still run Birmingham-Scotland trains, so a substantial part of the XC core traffic is removed.
Although obviously running North of Edinburgh hits the same lack of electrodiesel problem.

HSTEd said:

Absence of a 300+km/h capable electrodiesel train anywhere in the world.
Best available is currently onl 250km/h, which is probably too slow even for the Birmingham-Manchester/Leeds sections of HS2.

Electrification would be a huge project because it would mean effectively going at least all the way to plymouth and probably penzance.

We can however still run Birmingham-Scotland trains, so a substantial part of the XC core traffic is removed.
Although obviously running North of Edinburgh hits the same lack of electrodiesel problem.

Click to expand...

Why not HAUL a HS electric unit on an unwired extremity? Push-pull, with quick connect auto-couplers clearly, including control and head end power connections.

HS2 trains are quite expensive and they'd spend more time trundling along the classic rail network than they would on HS2 tracks. The demand pattern on XC services is quite different to the planned classic-compatible HS2 services. The Scotland-London trains will spend more time on the WCML than on HS2 but they'll be largely full once leaving Scotland, and won't be stopping that often or at all to pick up more passengers on the way south. XC services act as a series of separate regional services joined up with a lot of churn - people going from York to Sheffield overlaying people going from Leeds/Doncaster to Derby and so on.

I believe the best thing to do once the inverted A network (HS2 to Scotland plus NPR) is complete is to start building towards the south west from both London and Birmingham. You'd need a new underground through station underneath Birmingham city centre, but it would provide the best way to create long-distance links through Birmingham. Unlike HS2, there won't be the same push for bypasses of city centres - the best thing would be a fast and dedicated line into and out of each major city served by the line with all trains stopping. That's necessary to serve those overlapping regional journeys - a point-to-point network simply won't work in terms of passenger volumes and running costs.

MarkyT said:

Why not HAUL a HS electric unit on an unwired extremity? Push-pull, with quick connect auto-couplers clearly, including control and head end power connections.

Click to expand...

Well those sorts of operations have largely fallen out of favour in the modern era.
Not sure if many modern units can receive hotel power from adjacent units either.

NotATrainspott said:

I believe the best thing to do once the inverted A network (HS2 to Scotland plus NPR) is complete is to start building towards the south west from both London and Birmingham. You'd need a new underground through station underneath Birmingham city centre, but it would provide the best way to create long-distance links through Birmingham. Unlike HS2, there won't be the same push for bypasses of city centres - the best thing would be a fast and dedicated line into and out of each major city served by the line with all trains stopping. That's necessary to serve those overlapping regional journeys - a point-to-point network simply won't work in terms of passenger volumes and running costs.

Click to expand...

Why would you spend all that money on an underground station when you could build a line through/under South Birmingham from the south end of the Airport HS2 station to join up with the line towards Cheltenham?

Reversing in Curzon Street won't take too long now we have modern multiple unit trains, and the line will cost far less than a huge underground station complex.

HSTEd said:

Why would you spend all that money on an underground station when you could build a line through/under South Birmingham from the south end of the Airport HS2 station to join up with the line towards Cheltenham?

Reversing in Curzon Street won't take too long now we have modern multiple unit trains, and the line will cost far less than a huge underground station complex.

Click to expand...

This is logic that I think will be applied to Manchester Piccadilly, with services exiting the HS2 tunnel being able to run in to both the new HS2 platforms and the existing train shed, before reversing out on the classic lines towards Huddersfield and Leeds.

I think NPR will be suped-up transpennine route upgrade, which will be echoed on the line heading to Bristol.

Would Curzon Street as currently designed be able to support a couple of extra trains per hour from the South West?

trentvalley said:

The problem is who is they? Birmingham City Council? Bull Ring owners? Network Rail? Avanti?

Each will want the others to foot the bill of whatever the plan might be.

Click to expand...

They would be whoever owns that (?public) highway and foot route. Presumably largely BCC. It would also be to their significant advantage if they want to improve the image of their city. Like wise from a reputation point of view the Bull Ring owners should and I imagine would be willing to contribute. In fact I really don’t see why they’d not be willing to contribute towards making their environs cleaner and safer.

Noddy said:

They would be whoever owns that (?public) highway and foot route. Presumably largely BCC. It would also be to their significant advantage if they want to improve the image of their city. Like wise from a reputation point of view the Bull Ring owners should and I imagine would be willing to contribute. In fact I really don’t see why they’d not be willing to contribute towards making their environs cleaner and safer.

Click to expand...

The Bullring want people to walk through their shopping centre and I believe the plan was to close beggars' alley completely. But yes, BCC and the WMCA will need to do something about that disgusting underground hole.

The alleyway was originally not for public use. People still used it. You won't stop people using it despite what the local shopping centre wants. Might as well make it a pleasant experience to walk through as it's one of the gateways to the city.

Be interesting to see how (or if) they divert bus services to make the crossing over to New Street better

Geezertronic said:

Be interesting to see how (or if) they divert bus services to make the crossing over to New Street better

Click to expand...

The Curzon St HS2:Masterplan document outlines some proposals. https://www.birmingham.gov.uk/birminghamcurzonhs2

On page 46 a ‘key principle’ is ’One station’ connections between railway stations whatever that means!

From what I can tell having just skimmed it Moor Street Queensway will remain open to public transport but will be closed to other traffic outside the station. It also looks like they are planning to send some buses down Meriden St/New Canal St (same route as the trams) under the new HS2 station and round that way which will further reduce the traffic. No doubt the final result will be different to these proposals but it will be interesting to see and I imagine that BCC and other stakeholders will want it to be as easy as possible.

PartyOperator said:

Would Curzon Street as currently designed be able to support a couple of extra trains per hour from the South West?

Click to expand...

Bearing in mind the cost of building new chords what operational advantage would this bring to anyone apart from saving the transfer? It would result in reversing at Curzon St which is never quick for through travel.

Assuming full electrification to Bristol and beyond (which sadly appears many many years in the future) much cheaper and I think useful would be a junction where HS2 runs parallel with the line towards Water Orton. This would allow XC trains from the SW to both the NW and NE access to HS2 after stopping at Birmingham New Street. You could even potentially run some direct via the Camp Hill line which wouldn’t stop at all, and give some great journey time savings eg Bristol-Leeds is currently around 3hrs 25min but looking at journey time calculators you could easily get this down to 2hrs 15min and probably closer to 2 hours with upgrades to the Birmingham-Bristol line. However let’s get HS2 built first before worrying about that kind of stuff!

HSTEd said:

Why would you spend all that money on an underground station when you could build a line through/under South Birmingham from the south end of the Airport HS2 station to join up with the line towards Cheltenham?

Reversing in Curzon Street won't take too long now we have modern multiple unit trains, and the line will cost far less than a huge underground station complex.

Click to expand...

I remain fundamentally unconvinced by the notion of running NPR services into and out of a terminal station at Manchester. You'd need to build more platforms anyway, because the NPR service would be more frequent and wouldn't be able to make use of the limited number of 400m platforms currently planned for HS2. We have still seen incredibly little real detail about the implementation of NPR. So far it's been all very high level stuff to try to justify looking at it at all, rather than a really implementable railway plan. It's still at the 'NR New Lines Programme' stage rather than the April 2010 publishing of the original HS2 scheme, which the current plan has followed pretty much exactly since.

The point I was making is that high speed services to the south west would be quite fundamentally different to those going north-south to London. You would need to run overlapping express services more like those you see on the continent. The benefit of bypassing cities is minimal - the only way to make up the passenger numbers is to stop fairly often. The loss of passengers from slightly longer end-to-end journeys is more than made up by the greater efficiency of having more passengers on the trains. There's essentially no efficiency gain from running a Scotland-London service through the centre of Manchester or Birmingham since the train is already full of London passengers, so you need to run separate trains from London to Birmingham and Manchester while the Scotland passengers are slowed down and take up valuable space on the tracks.

Building an underground station in Birmingham is hardly going to be the straw that broke the camel's back with any new lines to the south west. It's either not going to happen at all, or it's going to happen properly with through services in a tunnel.

NotATrainspott said:

The point I was making is that high speed services to the south west would be quite fundamentally different to those going north-south to London. You would need to run overlapping express services more like those you see on the continent. The benefit of bypassing cities is minimal - the only way to make up the passenger numbers is to stop fairly often. The loss of passengers from slightly longer end-to-end journeys is more than made up by the greater efficiency of having more passengers on the trains. There's essentially no efficiency gain from running a Scotland-London service through the centre of Manchester or Birmingham since the train is already full of London passengers, so you need to run separate trains from London to Birmingham and Manchester while the Scotland passengers are slowed down and take up valuable space on the tracks.

Building an underground station in Birmingham is hardly going to be the straw that broke the camel's back with any new lines to the south west. It's either not going to happen at all, or it's going to happen properly with through services in a tunnel.

Click to expand...

Underground stations in city centres are astronomically expensive when they have to handle large numbers of passengers, as I'm sure Bald Rick will drop by to attest.
In order to get a high speed connection to the southwest you only need about 25km of mostly underground plain line from the vicinity of the top of the Lickey Incline to the south end of the Birmingham International railway station.

As there are four tracks between the Birmingham junction complex and the north end of international, there are no real concerns about capacity.

Reversing will only cost you a few minutes in Curzon Street, the transit to Birmingham international is ~9 minutes and then the 25km to Bromsgrove will take less than 6-7 minutes as the train can be moving at the LIckey's line speed when it leaves the junction.

So we are looking at 21-22 minutes from arriving in Curzon Street to Bromsgrove.

The position where we join the classic line is 16km (straight line) from Birmingham New Street.
So we would be looking at about 18-20km or so of route once the alignment is sorted out with an approach on the far side.

So 5km of plain route or a station.
Not hard to see which is going to be cheaper.

Even HSL is going to take 4-5 or so minutes to cover that distance, and then there is the 2-3 minutes the train will need anyway in the underground station to empty out and reboard.

So you save 13-14 minutes, but in return I don't have to spend money on a many many billion pound underground station that will serve no other lines and be an inconvenience for people that use it, and I can serve the Interchange.
(That might allow you to relieve London traffic headed to the northern part of GWR land, OOC to Interchange is only 31 minutes, which doesn't get you much beyond Reading on the GWML)

As to non-call at Birmingham trains, we don't really know what hte traffic pattern would be in the long run, a HSL to the South West could be expected to cause an explosion of day trippers to Somerset/Devon (even Cornwall if it ever gets that far).

Through stations are good in my opinion, but only if it allows you to consolidate all trains into a single station.
Consolidation is the big deal here, and keeping the trains at Curzon Street keeps them consolidated.

Any kind of high speed connection from Birmingham towards the south-west would only operate a maximum of two or three trains per hour to Bristol and beyond, and a similar number to South Wales. This would be a big capacity boost even though it's not much more frequent than today, because they would be 200m trains in place of 170s and Voyagers. That sort of frequency isn't going to justify a tunnel under Birmingham, let alone an underground station or a high-speed line from the Birmingham Interchange to join the existing somewhere near Cheltenham (about 40 miles, much of it through fairly hilly and scenic countryside). Using Curzon Street is also problematic because that station has been "sized" for the service planned under HS2.

However I believe that provision for a connection to the existing route somewhere in the Washwood Heath to Water Orton area would be worthwhile, allowing not only the extension of north-east and north-west services via New Street to the south-west, but also the possibility of high-speed West-East services across the Midlands using another connection somewhere near Toton.

I would expect any tunnel to link into the existing Curzon Street spur at the Washwood Heath depot, so the length of new track would be as small as you could possibly make it. Building long sections of even plain line that bypass the city isn't necessarily going to be cheaper. This is why I think a relatively straightforward station under Birmingham, not much more elaborate than one of the bored Elizabeth Line stations, would be the best option. This is especially so if it then allows the existing classic rail network to be shifted even more over to an S-Bahn service that would otherwise require a similarly or even more expensive city centre tunnel to bypass New Street.

Doing the quick and nasty link from HS2 onto the New Street network seems extremely unlikely in my book, since it would create a terrible timetable linkage between the two networks. Yes, it might mean you could run a service off of HS2 and onto the current line to Bristol, but it's not clear you would actually want to. It might be less unacceptable to re-use the classic line if the busiest and most complex sections of the network are also bypassed with new infrastructure like the tunnel.

What may well help the notion of a Birmingham HS2 tunnel is if more of the Phase 2 network gets turned into a Neubaustrecke network of new lines for use by both HS2 London/Birmingham and more regional express services. I know that there's an idea to run some Derby/Nottingham services on HS2 to Birmingham, and I think the idea is worth considering, but only if it's a more comprehensive concept rather than a daft 1tph service tacked on just because someone had an idea. This would closer align with the NPR idea for further north. In Birmingham's case, you could essentially move all of the current LDHS services out of New Street and classic lines and onto the new HS2 infrastructure. With trains similar to those proposed for NPR you would run services like Liverpool to Cardiff via the WCML, then the Handsacre Link, the Curzon Street spur, the tunnel, then whatever medium-large stops there are towards Wales. You'd then have a few more trains per hour running through the tunnel and the existing network above could be used for an even more consistent stopping service. Essentially all that's required for this to work is for the NPR-like trains to be compatible with the level boarding and platform edge doors planned for HS2.

HSTEd said:

Underground stations in city centres are astronomically expensive when they have to handle large numbers of passengers, as I'm sure Bald Rick will drop by to attest.
In order to get a high speed connection to the southwest you only need about 25km of mostly underground plain line from the vicinity of the top of the Lickey Incline to the south end of the Birmingham International railway station.

As there are four tracks between the Birmingham junction complex and the north end of international, there are no real concerns about capacity.

Reversing will only cost you a few minutes in Curzon Street, the transit to Birmingham international is ~9 minutes and then the 25km to Bromsgrove will take less than 6-7 minutes as the train can be moving at the LIckey's line speed when it leaves the junction.

So we are looking at 21-22 minutes from arriving in Curzon Street to Bromsgrove.

The position where we join the classic line is 16km (straight line) from Birmingham New Street.
So we would be looking at about 18-20km or so of route once the alignment is sorted out with an approach on the far side.

So 5km of plain route or a station.
Not hard to see which is going to be cheaper.

Even HSL is going to take 4-5 or so minutes to cover that distance, and then there is the 2-3 minutes the train will need anyway in the underground station to empty out and reboard.

So you save 13-14 minutes, but in return I don't have to spend money on a many many billion pound underground station that will serve no other lines and be an inconvenience for people that use it, and I can serve the Interchange.
(That might allow you to relieve London traffic headed to the northern part of GWR land, OOC to Interchange is only 31 minutes, which doesn't get you much beyond Reading on the GWML)

As to non-call at Birmingham trains, we don't really know what hte traffic pattern would be in the long run, a HSL to the South West could be expected to cause an explosion of day trippers to Somerset/Devon (even Cornwall if it ever gets that far).

Through stations are good in my opinion, but only if it allows you to consolidate all trains into a single station.
Consolidation is the big deal here, and keeping the trains at Curzon Street keeps them consolidated.

Click to expand...

You say 21-22 minutes from Bromsgrove to Curzon St via your ‘M42’ link line to Birmingham International (or do you mean Interchange?-I’m find these suggestions a little hard to follow). Is that any quicker than the current non-stop journey time via the Camp Hill line? Correct me if I’m wrong or have misunderstood? Your suggestion but that seems likely to be very expensive for a very very marginal gain.

Remember that HS2 is going into/coming out of a tunnel just by the Washwood Heath Depot that runs towards Water Orton.

HSTEd said:

Well those sorts of operations have largely fallen out of favour in the modern era.
Not sure if many modern units can receive hotel power from adjacent units either.

Click to expand...

We're talking about new build trains so that could be specified. It should be technically feasible, even if jumper cables have to be attached manually. Splitting and joining of units remains as popular as ever and is a core operational concept of HS2. Correctly implemented, attaching and detaching a modern loco for off-wire work should be no more trouble.

Seems appropriate to include my Curzon Street classic connections concept here for Cross Country services diverted over HS2 northern arms.
View attachment 72981
The idea would be to run portions from the south and south west, joined at Birmingham to form full length trains.

The Planner said:

Remember that HS2 is going into/coming out of a tunnel just by the Washwood Heath Depot that runs towards Water Orton.

Click to expand...

According to the interactive route maps the first c1.3km out of Curzon Street is on a viaduct. The next c3km is described as ‘retaining wall’ before entering a tunnel portal and then tunnel around the eastern end of Washwood Heath (the A47/A4040 roundabout). I don’t think room or space for junctions or chords between HS2 and various classic lines is a particularly limiting factor. More the issue is what operational impacts (positive and negative) the various options would have (and I would suggest you’re the expert on that), together with the cost of building them.

HSTEd said:

Not sure if many modern units can receive hotel power from adjacent units either.

Click to expand...

Use a steam-era solution: the loco provides traction and the coaches use their regeneration capability with battery backup to generate hotel power from the train's motion.

Noddy said:

You say 21-22 minutes from Bromsgrove to Curzon St via your ‘M42’ link line to Birmingham International (or do you mean Interchange?-I’m find these suggestions a little hard to follow).

Click to expand...

Something like that, 20 odd minutes for Curzon Street to vicinity Bromsgrove with an intermediate stop at Interchange.

Noddy said:

Is that any quicker than the current non-stop journey time via the Camp Hill line? Correct me if I’m wrong or have misunderstood? Your suggestion but that seems likely to be very expensive for a very very marginal gain.

Click to expand...

The Camp Hill line doesn't connect to Curzon Street and the Camp Hill Line will be full of local trains.
I am simply trying to find the cheapest way of allowing trains to leave Birmingham Curzon Street and head to the Southwest.

The interchange at Birmingham Interchange for London-Worcester or similar passengers is merely a bonus.

Eddd said:

Use a steam-era solution: the loco provides traction and the coaches use their regeneration capability with battery backup to generate hotel power from the train's motion.

Click to expand...

That's a really good idea. With sufficient capacity, batteries could also assist with acceleration, with piecemeal discontinuous electrification helping to reduce emissions in urban areas, improve performance on steep hills like the Devon banks, and extend fuel and battery range. The latest N700 series Shinkansen trains in Japan, for example, include sufficient on-board storage to get to the next station in case of a power outage. The unit could start off with a full charge when transitioning from electric to diesel haulage and the loco could exert a little more effort than otherwise necessary at times to help recharge. Use of regen brakes on the electric unit as much as possible would help save brake wear, charging the battery or diverted to resistor banks as appropriate.

HSTEd said:

Something like that, 20 odd minutes for Curzon Street to vicinity Bromsgrove with an intermediate stop at Interchange.

The Camp Hill line doesn't connect to Curzon Street and the Camp Hill Line will be full of local trains.
I am simply trying to find the cheapest way of allowing trains to leave Birmingham Curzon Street and head to the Southwest.

The interchange at Birmingham Interchange for London-Worcester or similar passengers is merely a bonus.

Click to expand...

It's a very interesting idea. The B'ham interchange stop could also provide some faster connections going from say south west to north as well, particularly into Scottish trains, assuming that some will stop at Interchange. Would avoid all the complications of my classic connections in the throat area, but might need some enhancements to the Curzon St throat nonetheless, as it would significantly increase the number of movements in that area, particularly if involving portions as I suggested earlier, although maybe these might preferably split and join at Interchange instead of Curzon St. Maybe a grade separation, an additional approach track for a distance, more parallelism, or some combination. The main advantage is that it would take the longer distance cross country services off the existing lines approaching Birmingham from all directions, leaving more capacity for other local services and freight. The junction to the south of Birmingham interchange would be fairly easy as it could branch off from the platform loops at moderate speed rather than requiring new high-speed connections to the through lines. Roughly Following the M42 corridor I guess it would join the Cheltenham line near Blackwell at the top of the Lickey incline.

HSTEd said:

Something like that, 20 odd minutes for Curzon Street to vicinity Bromsgrove with an intermediate stop at Interchange.

The Camp Hill line doesn't connect to Curzon Street and the Camp Hill Line will be full of local trains.
I am simply trying to find the cheapest way of allowing trains to leave Birmingham Curzon Street and head to the Southwest.

The interchange at Birmingham Interchange for London-Worcester or similar passengers is merely a bonus.

Click to expand...

I’m not sure a new line between Bromsgrove and Birmingham Interchange would be the cheapest option!!

Clearly these are just fag packet ideas but in terms of cheapness I’d imagine something like this:

1) Simple connection between HS2 and the Water Orton line somewhere between Saltley and Washwood Heath. Probably a few £10s of millions. This would not allow access to Curzon St but XC trains from the SW could call at Birmingham New Street or go through without stopping and then access HS2 towards both Manchester and Leeds. Operationally problems at New St could then cascade onto HS2 (but this will also be true elsewhere).

2) Build a new chord/viaduct off the Camp Hill line into Curzon St Station or something like MarkyT suggestion. This would be a more complex undertaking than option 1 and may potentially require new platforms as well but would allow direct access into the station by XC trains. Maybe a few £100 million depending on exactly you did and from which lines you accessed the station from/to. XC trains would need to reverse, which would be a time penalty for through passengers, but no need to call at New Street and have potential problems there.

3) Build a new line Bromsgrove to Birmingham Interchange. Minimum £10 billion I’d imagine. Avoid issues with ‘Classic’ lines in Birmingham but there may be capacity issues on HS2 between Interchange and the Birmingham branch, plus I’m not sure how it would work as XC trains via Birmingham would either need to terminate or incur a very large time penalty for through passengers??

4) Anything that involves significant tunnelling and/or a new underground station in Birmingham. Many many billion I’d imagine. This would be the cleanest option but I just can’t imagine the price would ever justify it. Unless built directly under Curzon St or New Street this would be a fifth large city centre station! 35 years ago there were only two!

Anyway this is all entirely hypothetical. There’s basically no point in any of this until the Birmingham Bristol line is electrified. And ideally you probably also want Swansea and Exeter done too.

Finally I’m not sure you can say the Camp Hill line will be full of local trains-isn’t it due to be 2 local stopping trains per hour when it reopens? Plus I guess some freight.

Noddy said:

3) Build a new line Bromsgrove to Birmingham Interchange. Minimum £10 billion I’d imagine.

Click to expand...

If ~25 route kilometres from the top of the Lickey to the Interchange costs £10bn then we might as well pack up and go home.

Even tunnelling the entire way would probably much less than that.

Noddy said:

Avoid issues with ‘Classic’ lines in Birmingham but there may be capacity issues on HS2 between Interchange and the Birmingham branch, plus I’m not sure how it would work as XC trains via Birmingham would either need to terminate or incur a very large time penalty for through passengers??

Click to expand...

Very large time penalty compared to what?

20-odd minutes from arriving in Curzon street from the North to Bromsgrove is not quick, but its hardly substantially slower than the alternative you are proposing of travelling in on the classic line.
Bromsgrove-Birmingham is ~21 minutes with one stop.
The Camp Hill Line might be faster than via University, but it won't be hugely faster.
It is still 21km and includes a reversal if you approach from the direction of Curzon Street.

Noddy said:

Anyway this is all entirely hypothetical. There’s basically no point in any of this until the Birmingham Bristol line is electrified. And ideally you probably also want Swansea and Exeter done too.

Click to expand...

Well 250km/h might be fast enough on the phase 2 sections of HS2 depending on the intricacies of timetabling, and there is always the loco haul solution to consider.

Noddy said:

Finally I’m not sure you can say the Camp Hill line will be full of local trains-isn’t it due to be 2 local stopping trains per hour when it reopens? Plus I guess some freight.

Click to expand...

Given the line passes through built up terrain, I think it's safe to say that 2 local trains per hour is unlikely to be the limit of their ambition long term.
I imagine the primary constraint is pathing through New Street, which HS2 partially ameliorates.1

HSTEd said:

If ~25 route kilometres from the top of the Lickey to the Interchange costs £10bn then we might as well pack up and go home.

Even tunnelling the entire way would probably much less than that.

Click to expand...

Have you met HS2? I **** you not it’d cost 10 billion. The Waverley line cost 350 million (at 2012 prices/£419 in 2019 prices) and that was for a non-electrified basic low speed reopening with no complex junctions.

HSTEd said:

Very large time penalty compared to what?

20-odd minutes from arriving in Curzon street from the North to Bromsgrove is not quick, but its hardly substantially slower than the alternative you are proposing of travelling in on the classic line.
Bromsgrove-Birmingham is ~21 minutes with one stop.
The Camp Hill Line might be faster than via University, but it won't be hugely faster.
It is still 21km and includes a reversal if you approach from the direction of Curzon Street.

Click to expand...

Compared to getting off at Interchange and catching the next train to the north. Or compared to trains that don’t call at Birmingham at all.

Noddy said:

Have you met HS2?

Click to expand...

The abomination that is the HS2 costings spawn from (IMO) poor design choices, overspecification and poor political decisions.

Noddy said:

I **** you not it’d cost 10 billion. The Waverley line cost 350 million (at 2012 prices) and that was for a non-electrified basic reopening.

Click to expand...

That is more than twice the length in route terms?
And reopenings in cases where the line is long gone aren't really much cheaper than new alignments, virtually everything needs rebuilding anyway.

Noddy said:

Compared to getting off at Interchange and catching the next train to the north. Or compared to trains that don’t call at Birmingham at all.

Click to expand...

Well the specifics of the timetable are up to the people operating the railway.
But the Bromsgrove-International option does rather well in both of those cases for obvious reasons.