Congestion at New Street - can this issue be fixed?

[TSR :D]

I think we know there's huge issue with congestion at New Street, and I think this problem needs to be fixed soon as it's starting more and more common for passengers to wait 10-20 minutes on the approach into New Street.

Is there any plans to fix this issue? Does anyone else have any suggestions to fix this issue?

Would be diverting some of local stopping services (and possibly intercity as well) if possible into Moor Street and then quadrupling the line to either side of the Moor Street (A new tunnel or enlarging of existing tunnel would be needed) and finally letting HS2 to use New Street instead of building new Curzon Street be cheaper?

 

[Mojo]

I don't believe there are any services that are suitable for diversion into Moor St; certainly without any more infrastructure being created.

Also what would the advantage be of sending HS2 trains into New St? The main entrance to the proposed HS2 terminal will be just as close to to the city centre as New St is.

 

[Simon11]

Once all the platforms are open, this should help release the pressure.

 

[dvboy]

Yes, one of the major causes at the moment is the closure of one platform at any given time.

 

[edwin_m]

There's a plan (unfunded) to build new curves up to the Camp Hill line so that trains towards Tamworth and Longbridge can start from the unused bays at Moor Street, also providing a service to new stations on the Camp Hill line. Potentially some XC trains could also use it, but they probably won't because many passengers would need to change to/from other trains that are still at New Street.

 

[Whistler40145]

Is it feasible for a chord to be built so trains from the Wolverhampton direction can call at Birmingham Moor Street?

 

[Geezertronic]

Is it feasible for a chord to be built so trains from the Wolverhampton direction can call at Birmingham Moor Street?

I believe there used to be a line between Wolves (Low Level) and Snow Hill which is now used in the main by the Midland Metro

 

[HowardGWR]

I believe there used to be a line between Wolves (Low Level) and Snow Hill which is now used in the main by the Midland Metro

In fairness, the suggested link does give a more convenient interchange at New St. I get the impression that the centre of Brum will need festooning with travolators by 2030.

 

[alwaystouchout]

Could they build sub-surface platforms at Moor Street so some New Street trains could call there instead? It could be part of a wider scheme to incorporate the HS2 terminus at Moor Street?

 

[The Planner]

No, the 4 lines into New St are underneath Moor St station.

 

[alwaystouchout]

Not impossible though? Surely the area itself is going to have to be remodelled anyway to accommodate the HS2 terminus.

 

[The Planner]

Nothing gets remodelled in terms of the tracks into New St. You literally cannot go underneath Moor St. Check it out on Googlemaps and you will see.

 

[fgwrich]

Nothing gets remodelled in terms of the tracks into New St. You literally cannot go underneath Moor St. Check it out on Googlemaps and you will see.

Of course didnt Railtrack do it's bit to not help several years back when they were offered some space for either an additional track, junction or platform? into the station before The Bull Ring redevelopment. Railtrack Declined, the space was incorporated I believe into the foundations for the Bull Ring.

 

[The Planner]

It would have been for an extra tunnel, no use when the platforms are full.

 

[Buttsy]

I know this sounds a mad idea from the 70s or 80s, but how about a new tunnel from a 'flying' junction near Duddeston, under New Street station (with an exit to Moor Street) and then coming out near Five Ways on another 'flying' junction. This would move Cross-City services (12tph on current off-peak timetable) out of teh main station and free up space and paths through New Street.

 

[Whistler40145]

Is there anywhere in e.g. the Smethwick area whereby a Flyover could be built connecting to the Soho-Perry Barr line, thus enabling services to divert via Moor Street?

 

[Grumpy]

I know this sounds a mad idea from the 70s or 80s, but how about a new tunnel from a 'flying' junction near Duddeston, under New Street station (with an exit to Moor Street) and then coming out near Five Ways on another 'flying' junction. This would move Cross-City services (12tph on current off-peak timetable) out of teh main station and free up space and paths through New Street.

Nothing mad about it all. Why is it only London that can have money spent on underground railways? Would make more sense shifting cross-City and indeed all the other EMU operated services to new platforms under New St then using the space saved upstairs to run HS2 into New St. Extend one of the tunnels towards Coventry to clear the local services from the main line then run HS2 trains in on the existing route. Forget Curzon St and a separate line in for HS2.

 

[TSR :D]

I don't believe there are any services that are suitable for diversion into Moor St; certainly without any more infrastructure being created.

Also what would the advantage be of sending HS2 trains into New St? The main entrance to the proposed HS2 terminal will be just as close to to the city centre as New St is.

I was wondering if it was cheaper to build infrastructure that allows some of local trains to be diverted and send HS2 into New Street. This would mean killing three (?) birds with one stone as this would be cheaper, there will be less congestion at New Street, and it would also mean building those infrastructure will increase the effective capacity between the two stations as HS2 station won't be used by local trains.

Do we really need another station in Birmingham City Centre?

 

[HSTEd]

Fitting multiple 400m platforms into New Street is a nightmare, I know I have tried.

You end up with totally reconstructing the approach, at which point it would probably be better to do a Stuttgart and close New Street entirely in favour of an underground through station on a loop line.

 

[Bald Rick]

I know this sounds a mad idea from the 70s or 80s, but how about a new tunnel from a 'flying' junction near Duddeston, under New Street station (with an exit to Moor Street) and then coming out near Five Ways on another 'flying' junction. This would move Cross-City services (12tph on current off-peak timetable) out of teh main station and free up space and paths through New Street.

In pre HS2 days, when looking at at a high speed London-Midlands-North-Scotland, we did have a very cursory (kitchen table standard) look at putting the High Speed platforms under New Street as part of a big interchange. Indeed basically routing the high speed line via central Birmingham, thence straight to the north west. Much better from a high speed line journey time point of view than going via the existing New St . I shudder to think about a 400m train entering and leaving New Street at 10mph.

However it got very very expensive and disruptive to build, both to rail travellers and the fabric of central Birmingham.

 

[Roverman]

Yes, one of the major causes at the moment is the closure of one platform at any given time.

The other major cause is the closure of half of the platform so that the workman have some kind of 'area' although I don't know what they do with this space.

The obvious answer to this is to herd passengers onto trains at the doors nearest to them and make them walk down, with departing passengers walking up what's left of the platform.

 

[dysonsphere]

Of course didnt Railtrack do it's bit to not help several years back when they were offered some space for either an additional track, junction or platform? into the station before The Bull Ring redevelopment. Railtrack Declined, the space was incorporated I believe into the foundations for the Bull Ring.

I remember that shambles wasnt even a lot of money as it would have been worked into the new bullring build. Stupid railtrack lack of thinking it was only going to be bare tunnel but at least it would have been there.

 

[The Planner]

What would it have solved? It doesn't help with platform capacity.

 

[kjhskj75]

Would there be any value in losing the three "middle roads" and using the space to widen the platforms ?

Presumably those tracks were for locomotives running round, do they have any function nowadays ?

 

[HowardGWR]

What would it have solved? It doesn't help with platform capacity.

Indeed, surely it would be the reopening of Moor St and Snow Hill to commuter services from Wolves, the black country and beyond that would help that, surely?

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Would there be any value in losing the three "middle roads" and using the space to widen the platforms ?

Presumably those tracks were for locomotives running round, do they have any function nowadays ?

The 'centre roads' are used to allow two trains to occupy one platform and leave even if the other half is still occupied (and would otherwise block the route out). Losing this ability would increase congestion dramatically I'd have thought!

 

[The Planner]

Indeed, surely it would be the reopening of Moor St and Snow Hill to commuter services from Wolves, the black country and beyond that would help that, surely?

Not really, the problem is that New St is treated as a terminus with trains hanging around for too long.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The 'centre roads' are used to allow two trains to occupy one platform and leave even if the other half is still occupied (and would otherwise block the route out). Losing this ability would increase congestion dramatically I'd have thought!

Not sure what you mean by that, the platforms can currently actually hold three trains at once in some situations. The centre roads are the where the hot spares are normally kept, they aren't used for planned moves and certainly not for overtaking.

 

[edwin_m]

If some siding space could be found nearby (surely possible somewhere?) then perhaps the centre roads could be taken out? This ought to reduce congestion as transferring a train between a platform and a centre road needs two moves through the throat but putting it somewhere else would need only one. Downside could be that if the trains are further away it takes longer to get the crews to and from them.

I believe doing this and widening the platforms was mentioned somewhere as an option but I haven't seen any evidence of it happening.

 

[GingerSte]

I've never seen the middle roads used for overtaking, but it might be possible. I don't know the track layout well enough to answer. Assuming it's not, then I would agree that widening of three platforms (as part of the refurbishment) would have helped. It needn't be the three I've done in the sketch below (there are 8 combinations of platform widening available), but you get the idea.

Alternatively, if overtaking was required, then a solution akin to platform 4C could be achieved by widening only part of the platform. This would require an analysis of how much platform length would be required by the overtaking train and the bay platform.

 

[The Planner]

This looks like a solution looking for a problem. It wouldn't make sense to platform a train where the other end is blocked, you find a different platform for it. Widening the platforms would have required re-signalling, not a good idea to do at the same time, which is why resignalling is being started afterwards.