LOL The Irony
On Moderation
Just goes to show the stupidity, hypocrisy and crowd mentality of these environmental protesters. They're the epitome of good idea, bad execution.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why are people opposed to HS2? (And other HS2 discussion)
- Thread starter ABB125
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Half the PurpleTrains terminate from the East at Paddington don't they? Why not extend more Paddington terminators to Slough/Maidenhead, and all as far as OOC. Is it because they decided to save a few bob by not buying an extra 10 units, or are there signalling problems on the slow?
Indeed, they would be better off doing something which impacts on the motorways, you could do something which wasn't illegal which caused traffic congestion.
I'm not going to say what, as I wouldn't want to be implemented in it. However needless to say the end result of impacting the roads would be, if you could maintain it for long enough, people switching away from cars which must be a better outcome than causing problems for electric mass transport systems.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,389
There isn’t track capacity on the slows (reliefs). It’s still a mixed traffic railway including freight. Even with the maximum possible 6 tph heading to Heathrow and 6 tph Maidenhead/Reading they will still have to reverse over half the trains at Westbourne Park or in future Old Oak.
it’s why so many people have proposed here over the years that Crossrail needed to have its own 5th and 6th tracks as far as Airport Junction...
There’s been highly publicised government strategies to address most of this & on a roughly similar timescale to the competition of HS2 I believe.
Last edited:
Would it be a better option to during the peaks, steer passengers from HS2 trains onto platforms where OOC starters were and if possible provide a bypass line that allows the ex-Readings/Maidenheads to skip OOC altogether? Alternatively, proovide an extra bi-di platform that allows the Lizzie trains to operate with local (GWML) peak loads only.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Agreed. Also, I would imagine the sheer length of the HS2 trains will spread passengers out: By the time the slowest passengers have walked from the furthest end of an arriving HS2 train, you could well find that a couple of CR trains will have already left, taking most of the faster/nearer HS2 passengers from that same HS2 train. Because of that, I can't imagine CR having much trouble coping with the crowds on 3tph from Birmingham (if, hypothetically, that was done for the first year or so).
It'll be even better for people arriving at OOC on CR trains because of the huge spread of arrival times - from chancers timing to arrive at the last minute to people with reserved booked seats who are making sure they get there 30-40 minutes early to be safe.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,389
I’ve lost track of the latest exact design. I know there’s supposed to be 8 platform tracks total on the GW mains and reliefs, but I don’t think there’s been any detail on exactly how and where reversals would happen. Possibly off topic for this thread now...
There was a plan to send most of the terminators up the WCML to Tring, which could've relieved pressure on the Euston throat during reconstruction. Alas, I believe the boiled egg cut it a few years ago.
Yes, why do these environmental movements always seem to end up doing something daft and counter-productive? It truly is a mystery... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Kennedy_(police_officer)#Ratcliffe_power_station_trial
The long term plan is that the Paddington throat and approaches get rebuilt to improve capacity and this would then allow all 24tph Crossrail services to run to OOC with the trains that will turn back at Westbourne would turn back at OOC instead.
Hence the 4 platforms for the relief lies at OOC.
Hence the 4 platforms for the relief lies at OOC.
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,935
If you mean Grayling, then Crossrail to Tring died long before he was in post, around 2014.
Yossarian22
Member
Not sure if this as already been mentioned (probably has)
Generally, I am in favour of HS2 a lot more than I used to be. Personally, my only two issues with HS2 are:
1. Doesn't stop in Milton Keynes or other major commuter centres between major cities much like the Shinkansen.
2. The design (especially Phase 1) and subsequent service pattern is all wrong to me -
The line branches off to Birmingham and doesn't go through it. This means that (according to the 2013 service pattern) Birmingham to London will only get 3tph, 4 in peak times. Say the Y split came south of Birmingham if there was a through service Birmingham would get 7-9tph (but no Leeds service). If the split was north of Birmingham would get 14-18tph with 7-9tph to Manchester and 7-9tph to Leeds. I prefer how phase 2b of HS2 is designed with East Midlands Hub and there have been ideas raised to make Leeds HS2 station a through station for services onwards to York, Newcastle and Edinburgh (though they will more likely probably go for a terminus as well). I don't like how Manchester is a Terminus either. Put simply I don't like Termini, why run three trains to three separate stations at different times when you can run three to all three in succession.
In reflection I can see why termini may be attractive, building one path into a city is cheaper than building through a city, especially if it is a tunnel (Crossrail) but cities such as Berlin have seen the benefits of through stations, Stuttgart is investing billions in replacing it's 17 track terminus station with an 8 track underground through station.
With regards to Milton Keynes while it is arguable it takes greater capacity off the WCML commuters would pack onto it in rush hour, this is the "too busy" argument. While a loss of intercity services to MK would raise times to London by about 11 min at most the massive increase in frequency arguably would add more useful capacity.
If anyone knows anything on top of all of this please mention it.
Apart from that, I like HS2. No HS2 is worse than HS2. I think it's far from perfect and I think in 40 years time we will be pulling it about to add things like through stations and more capacity, we may even do what we did with Milton Keynes and put a new town somewhere along the line.
Generally, I am in favour of HS2 a lot more than I used to be. Personally, my only two issues with HS2 are:
1. Doesn't stop in Milton Keynes or other major commuter centres between major cities much like the Shinkansen.
2. The design (especially Phase 1) and subsequent service pattern is all wrong to me -
The line branches off to Birmingham and doesn't go through it. This means that (according to the 2013 service pattern) Birmingham to London will only get 3tph, 4 in peak times. Say the Y split came south of Birmingham if there was a through service Birmingham would get 7-9tph (but no Leeds service). If the split was north of Birmingham would get 14-18tph with 7-9tph to Manchester and 7-9tph to Leeds. I prefer how phase 2b of HS2 is designed with East Midlands Hub and there have been ideas raised to make Leeds HS2 station a through station for services onwards to York, Newcastle and Edinburgh (though they will more likely probably go for a terminus as well). I don't like how Manchester is a Terminus either. Put simply I don't like Termini, why run three trains to three separate stations at different times when you can run three to all three in succession.
In reflection I can see why termini may be attractive, building one path into a city is cheaper than building through a city, especially if it is a tunnel (Crossrail) but cities such as Berlin have seen the benefits of through stations, Stuttgart is investing billions in replacing it's 17 track terminus station with an 8 track underground through station.
With regards to Milton Keynes while it is arguable it takes greater capacity off the WCML commuters would pack onto it in rush hour, this is the "too busy" argument. While a loss of intercity services to MK would raise times to London by about 11 min at most the massive increase in frequency arguably would add more useful capacity.
If anyone knows anything on top of all of this please mention it.
Apart from that, I like HS2. No HS2 is worse than HS2. I think it's far from perfect and I think in 40 years time we will be pulling it about to add things like through stations and more capacity, we may even do what we did with Milton Keynes and put a new town somewhere along the line.
It doesn't stop at Milton Keynes because it doesn't (I think) go very close to the place!
Personally I think a station somewhere in the Home Counties (perhaps where it crosses East-West rail) would be useful, but also appreciate the capacity impact it would have.
Grumpy Git
On Moderation
How many coaches would the first peak Liverpool-Manchester-Birmingham-Euston service need?
Yossarian22
Member
One of the things I think may happen is a station may be built where HS2 meets east-west rail and a new garden city developed there. It may be completely fantasy and would not happen for at least another 40 years. That is effectively what happened with Milton Keynes and the WCML, there was space and a mainline so they built there.
I would love to see it, but I'm not holding my breath
Yossarian22
Member
I hadn't thought of that. It is true that by separating the trains it would spread capacity over all of them and there fewer people fighting to be on the first train out. By the time trains to Machester/Liverpool reach Birmingham or trains to London stop at Birmingham they could by pretty packed and commuters aren't the best at spreading themselves.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Well I'm not sure that Liverpool-Manchester-London is a plausible route because Manchester is going too far in the 'wrong' direction for Liverpool-Birmingham. But if you run with the idea of a through station at Birmingham and think just about London-Manchester. Then I think it would be like:
As HS2 will be built, at the beginning of the peak, and within some small timeframe there'll be
- One train Birmingham-London
- One train Manchester-London
- One train Manchester-Birmingham.
(And yes I do understand the cost reasons why a through station at Birmingham isn't getting built).
Last edited:
Grumpy Git
On Moderation
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Yes it has. Probably lots of times
But anyway...Personally I'm pretty sympathetic to your argument about Birmingham, but not Milton Keynes. Using the reasoning in my other post from a few minutes ago, a through station at Birmingham, with all trains stopping there instead of terminating there would mean that most places would get far more frequent services to both Birmingham and London, using exactly the same paths. To my mind, that would have made HS2 even better (albeit a lot more expensive, which I'm sure is the main reason why that's not happening!)
But I wouldn't support running through Milton Keynes: I would say that the difference is that Birmingham is easily big enough to justify stopping most/all London-the North services there, with the slightly slower journey times more then compensated for by the frequency increase. But Milton Keynes - with its massively smaller population compared to Birmingham - is nowhere near big enough to justify stopping most HS2 services there. Plus Milton Keynes is a long way from the direct line between London and Birmingham that HS2 roughly follows, so you'd have to make HS2 a fair bit longer to serve Milton Keynes. And besides, Milton Keynes is already going to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of HS2, since basically everything on the WCML will be able to stop there post-HS2 (I would guess that, currently, it's only about half the trains stopping there, so MK will already see massive improvements in services).
Yes it has. Probably lots of times
Personally I'm pretty sympathetic to your argument about Birmingham, but not Milton Keynes. Using the reasoning in my other post from a few minutes ago, a through station at Birmingham, with all trains stopping there instead of terminating there would mean that most places would get far more frequent services to both Birmingham and London, using exactly the same paths. To my mind, that would have made HS2 even better (albeit a lot more expensive, which I'm sure is the main reason why that's not happening!)
But I wouldn't support running through Milton Keynes: I would say that the difference is that Birmingham is easily big enough to justify stopping most/all London-the North services there, with the slightly slower journey times more then compensated for by the frequency increase. But Milton Keynes - with its massively smaller population compared to Birmingham - is nowhere near big enough to justify stopping most HS2 services there. Plus Milton Keynes is a long way from the direct line between London and Birmingham that HS2 roughly follows, so you'd have to make HS2 a fair bit longer to serve Milton Keynes. And besides, Milton Keynes is already going to be one of the biggest beneficiaries of HS2, since basically everything on the WCML will be able to stop there post-HS2 (I would guess that, currently, it's only about half the trains stopping there, so MK will already see massive improvements in services).
In the standard hour MK currently has 3 calls of the 9/10 Avanti services each hour (Manchester, Chester, Scotland via W Mids), plus all 3 ‘fast’ LNW services, albeit one of these is over 40 mins (compared to 30 for the Avantis), and is overtaken by the subsequent Avanti en route between Leighton Buzzard and Bletchley, so effectively doesn’t show on journey planners.
However the nature of the timetable and flighting means they are not evenly spread through the hour. In the up direction, all 5 are in one half of the hour, there are 4 services in 16 minutes, 12 minute gap, the fast LNW from Crewe, then a 32 minute gap, before the flight starts in the next hour.
HS2 will certainly enable most, of not all services to call at MK, meaning more services but more importantly a better spread through the hour to create a turn up and go railway, rather like Reading.
Yossarian22
Member
I think going through Birmingham would be better, I was just noting in support of the previous post that it's likely that the first train from Manchester to London would be so packed that Birmingham passengers would have to compete with those already on the train and wait for the next train, though in critique it would not be far behind. Even better a through the station with the appropriate points could also be used as a terminus so an extra peak service could be run starting atBirmingham as well as Manchester
The key question is how you would route HS2 beyond Birmingham if you have a through station?
With very large groups like ER, sometimes there can be breakaway sub-groups which do their own thing, against the consensus of the core. The disruption to the tube in London is an example of this, The ER mass voted against mass disruption of the tube, but a small breakaway group went ahead with it anyway. The media don't tell you this, of course, because they want you to turn against them, because that suits the businees-as-usual neo-liberal capitalist agenda.
Yossarian22
Member
Personally would want the Y split north of Birmingham which would make not only Machester accessible from Birmingham but also Nottingham, Leeds, and Sheffield. This is going to happen under the current plans but the number of services could be quadrupled in this case (assuming 16tph between Lon and Birm and an equal split of 8 West, 8 East) from 2tph Birm-Leeds to 8 (based of 2013 stopping pattern). The split would probably have to go somewhere between West Bromich and Handsworth, around the M5, don't know the area much myself but based on the fact that it appears to be low-density housing with three golf courses and two parks the route would have to make significant use of tunnels to keep the local population happy
Yossarian22
Member
Being my age I know a lot of strong environmentalists and I'm pretty sympathetic. Not a single one is against rail as a whole. I've yet to meet a single person who opposes HS2 on environmental grounds who hasn't been swayed in their views after a sensible conversation about its effects.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Ah yes. Of course. There was me thinking that, it was just a case of, demonstrations and people's journeys getting disrupted naturally makes for a very newsworthy story that most people will be far more interested in, and the media naturally finds newsworthy stories (coz that's like, their job!) Silly me! But now I understand - clearly those headlines were all because of neo-liberal capitalists controlling the media, and a truly unbiased media would have been running headlines about how most XR members voted against disrupting the tube, and there would presumably have just been a small paragraph on page 15 about how tens (hundreds?) of thousands of people's journeys were getting ruined because of people who apparently didn't actually represent XR (despite that they were very obviously waving XR banners etc.) causing mass disruption to public transport.
I'm glad to have been corrected.
Speed43125
Member
Is it just I'm really tired right now, or is it very confusing to discern if this is meant to be sarcastic or not?
Whilst the capacity could be the same, you could end up with capacity being lower.
If you've got the ability to run 6tph London Birmingham Manchester, there would almost certainly be calls for there to be more of a split of services to elsewhere. In doing so you'd likely find that the service provision for cut to 4tph or 5tph and resulted in lower capacity.
Also the other thing to consider is that calling at Birmingham area quite a lot more time to the journey, as the line speeds drop as you approach Curzon Street so that you can get through the urban area now easily with the track.
This is shown by the journey times being 49 minutes to Birmingham and 68 minutes to Manchester whilst the Birmingham Manchester journey time is 40 minutes (total 89 minutes)
Peter Kelford
Member
- Joined
- 29 Nov 2017
- Messages
- 903
Marseille also is opting for a through station on its new underground extension, in general French stations are through with the exception of Paris. Lyon, Rennes, Nantes, Bordeaux, Toulouse etc.
- Status