By the time HS2 opens it might well be time to start replacing the Pendolinos.
-
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!
HS2: what signalling system is planned? also is the Handsacre connection no longer going ahead?
- Thread starter kevin_roche
- 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
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,942
Indeed, a strong possibility - although the Chinese might have a say about that (but not on this thread).
Elecman
Established Member
Why wouldn’t they be? The early morning services are basically Trent Valley/ Rugby commuter trains
Kettledrum
Member
- Joined
- 13 Nov 2010
- Messages
- 790
The Pendolino fast services from Stafford, Lichfield and Tamworth to London Euston are well patronized by commuters. Some services also stopping at Rugby. It would be a negative step to make these slower by using slower trains or introducing lots of additional stops after HS2.
Euston to Scotland via Birmingham is a relatively recent development anyway. Passengers will have to make do with connections at some combination of Birmingham/Crewe/Preston. How the WCML North of Preston can cope with HS2 is an as yet unresolved question, but two Birmingham - Scotland trains doesn't seem likely on top of the extra fast London services and claimed additional freight paths.
agbrs_Jack
Member
Wouldn't that be bad for Stoke either way then?
With one fast service per hour instead of 2.
Presumably they would (including me as Stoke is where I change for London) get some semi fast services.
All this relies on tilt being kept on the WCML fast lines after HS2 is open though.
With the talk of sections of the north WCML being 125mph capable without tilt, that feels to me like tilt may be gone either after HS2 phase 2a is open, or 390 stock becomes life expired. Maybe the former, given that maintenance standards for tilt are very high, and you'd have your high-speed railway elsewhere, with non tilt compatable trains.
Dave_Cardboard
Member
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2017
- Messages
- 215
I recall Andrew McNaughton indicating that HS2 train drivers won't actually be driving the trains on the HS2 lines - they hope to run on autopilot with drivers (for example) involved in safe despatch and having essentially a "monitoring" role (like an airline pilot.) Until something goes bad and the computers cannot cope....?
Last edited:
The incremental infrastructure maintenance standards for tilt are essentially nil. It’s the 125mph linespeed that drives the maintenance, not the tilt.
krus_aragon
Established Member
Furthermore, the Holyhead/Chester/Shrewsbury services will all be in the hands of the new 80x units in a few years, which aren't expected to be capable of tilting.
Yes, expect ATO. Just like on much of the tube, Thameslink, Crossrail, High Speed railways elsewhere, etc.
True, but tilt has allowed such higher speed limits in more places. I assume that on the curves involved there must be an appreciable increase in side wear on the outer rail.
China has recently inaugurated an ATO HS line. France has firm plans for TGVs to adopt this. Like Metros, HS rail is an ideal application because of its segregation, perimeter security, and modern civil engineering design standards keeping tracks well clear of potential obstacles such as large trees.
rf_ioliver
Member
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2011
- Messages
- 868
The main problems with GSM-R centers around the bandwidth and radio space allocation - GSM-R has a very well defined area of the radio spectrum which in many cases is saturated with interference from surrounding bands. LTE-R already exists and the capabilities in both LTE (4G) and 5G for more dynamic spectrum allocation solves many of these problems. Further to this are the kinds of services provided on top of the radio protocols need to be expanded for rail usage, eg: future signalling etc, that is going to be hard(er) to do with GSM-R, again for lots of reasons including bandwidth, interference and also thing such as latency - this is where LTE-R and 5G will provide better options.
5G also doesn't just mean the radio part, but also includes much more of the communications infrastructure such as Edge capabilities, device bandwith usage/optimisation/latency etc. Also in many applications I think you will see hybrid 5G/4G in the near future.
You can effectively forget Wifi for this.
Agreed tilt has enabled the higher speed. I hope there isn’t more sidewear, the flanges shouldn’t be touching the rail!
Class 170101
Established Member
- Joined
- 1 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 7,942
Not entirely convinced about ATO, whilst it allows the driver to concentrate on other things ATO doesn't always give a smooth ride in the open due to weather conditions. Despite ATO having been based on 1960s technology as updated since then it doesn't ride well on the Central Line (nor DLR) and can be subject to sharp braking compared to a driver who tends to be smoother than a computer that seems to deal in absolutes in my experience.
For railways will 5G cause problems by needing more masts?
It’s done like that on the underground and DLR to maximise capacity. On HS2 it will be done to provide consistent performance. And the trains won’t stop much!
That makes sense. What I was trying to express (badly) was that I suspect especially heavy (top) wear may occur on the outer rail of tight curves traversed at the higher speed tilt enables.
Last edited:
ATO systems typically have a number of settings available for driving style, ranging from 'Economy' to 'Performance'. Metros tend to alternate these according to the time of the day, using performance mode at peaks to compensate for longer dwells at stations or to catch up after delays, while reverting to more economical modes for a smoother ride and to save energy at quieter times.
Last edited:
rf_ioliver
Member
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2011
- Messages
- 868
Don't think masts are the problem, but the density and power output of the base stations. Also, base station design is extremely varied so in many situations large masts are not needed - you can use micro/nano base stations - depends upon the situation. Further base station antennas are designed to support directionality, beam focussing etc, so the design, placement, power output etc can all be customised, even during use.
5G brings a wide range of additional services and capabilities to the networks and shouldn't be thought of as a purely radio technology
You do need more masts though right? Which can be an issue for the railways for environmental grounds and access??
Also I have read there are issues with buildings etc - does that mean railway 5G would have more issues with bridges, tunnels, and cuttings?
The railway is (largely) free of planning constraints where the infrastructure is located on railway-owned property and solely used for operational purposes.
Out in the country does the railway have spare land for masts?
They'll probably just do the same as they did for GSM-R and re-purpose existing sites.
kevin_roche
Member
- Joined
- 26 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 930
If you talking about masts for 5G there are two choices. Masts as we have them now which would be the same with 5G on similar frequencies as GSM-R and smaller masts with much smaller equipment on much higher frequencies and needing lots more of them. The second will be used for 5G when there is a need for very large capacity for example in football stadia where everyone is streaming the match to their phone! If the signalling system is shared with other services which is what is being discussed for controlling cars then yould may need the high capacity version.
You may only need that in or around London and other busy cities. In fact the capacity of the basic 5G would be adequate for ETCS Level 3 and you would only need the more if you also want to have a list of everyone on board, what tickets they have bought and a list of all their friends too!
rf_ioliver
Member
- Joined
- 17 Apr 2011
- Messages
- 868
That's where the edge nodes and private networks come into play. For a stadium you can force all devices to specific base stations and locally process calls/data at the network edge. Data can be batch released in a much more controlled manner onto the core networks.
Chris125
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Nov 2009
- Messages
- 3,076
While the junction is a political necessity, perhaps a flat junction with the WCML would now suffice?
The Planner
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 15 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 15,963
Doubt you could get a high speed twin track junction in the limits of deviation, you might do but I doubt NR would agree to it even if its only 1tph. You are just making it into Colwich part 2.
- Status