ECML Speed - Will trains ever reach 140mph?

[whoosh]

oh that's easy, just build the 160 mph bits as a separate line.

Wait, if we're building a separate line anyway, why stick to 160 mph? We might as well go for 225 mph at that point

And what if then routed these new lines so that it's useful for many different destinations?

*accidentally redesigns HS2*

That's more like it!

 

[Bald Rick]

Now though... with in-cab signalling, why isn't it 160mph or above we are looking at?

Because the rest of the infrastructure isn’t built for it, excepts some parts of the geometry.

I believe the alignment of the Selby diversion was designed with a theoretical aspiration of 160 mph. York to Darlington as a whole is in the main very straight as well.

But nothing else on those sections is fit for anything more than 125moh without extensive reconstruction.

Greengage21 have an interesting (post IRP) proposal to build HS2 East as a series of bypasses to ECML, between Newark and the Selby Diversion

http://www.greengauge21.net/wp-content/uploads/GG21-East-Coast-High-Speed-FINAL.pdf

It does have the advantage that ECML trains from Kings Cross could use it too, much like SouthEastern on HS1. And the alignment should be much cheaper to build than the original phase 2b design.

This is just crayons with a professional badge on it. It’s not a series of bypasses - it’s about 70-80km of new high speed line From Newark (or possibly further west) and somewhere near Temple Hirst

 

[Meerkat]

Isn’t York-Edinburgh the priority, as it’s used by multiple routes and unlikely to be replaced by full HS even if HS takes London traffic toward the West?
My crayons get twitchy about the part from north of Pegswood (preferably north of Widdrington) to south of Cramlington and quadruple as much of the rest of the way. Get the expresses clear of local trains and allow a proper suburban service (local gains so less local opposition) as well as taking a chunk of time out of the expresses.

 

[Bill57p9]

The fastest timetabled Edinburgh-KGX train i'm aware of was the 5:40 am departure southbound, which did it in 4 hours. What kind of work would be needed to match that more regularly? The 5:40 only stops in Newcastle (it even skips York!), which obviously wouldn't be realistic for a more regular service, but could it be matched for, say, the fastest LNER service each hour?

Back in the 90s there was a weekday 0600 Edinburgh to Kings Cross calling Newcastle and York, scheduled to arrive 0959, I.e. (just) under 4 hours with 2 intermediate stops.
I used to commute on it quite regularly. However I also know from that experience that it wasn’t the most likely to arrive on time! Plus I accept that there are more trains running these days so such paths are more disruptive. My point though is that it can be and has been done.

 

[hexagon789]

Back in the 90s there was a weekday 0600 Edinburgh to Kings Cross calling Newcastle and York, scheduled to arrive 0959, I.e. (just) under 4 hours with 2 intermediate stops.
I used to commute on it quite regularly. However I also know from that experience that it wasn’t the most likely to arrive on time! Plus I accept that there are more trains running these days so such paths are more disruptive. My point though is that it can be and has been done.

At the start of electrification there were 2 up and 2 down services timed at 3h59, these were 4 of the 5 so-called Scottish Pullman services. All called at York and Newcastle only, except the single non-3h59 service.

An evening service calling at Darlington instead of York took 4hrs 08 and the northbound Flying Scotsman was also 4h08 with calls at Peterborough, York and Newcastle.

One Scottish Pullman was actually timed through to Glasgow in about 4h55 IIRC.

Timekeeping wasn't great, with only 1 min recovery margin in one direction and after just a year, the full standard amount was added back into the schedules.

Nevertheless the 3h59 timings came back after a few years, but seem to only have applied to one service each way after that. They disappeared again at privatisation but GNER brought them back briefly in the early-2000s. After one year, one was adjusted back to a normal schedule with more calling points, the other was padded out to 4 hours 2 mins.

Even in the days when a few mph over the limit was more common, absolute right time arrival was about 30%.

After that, I think the next fastest is the up only 4 hours timing of the Flying Scotsman which has applied since the 2011 'Eureka' timetable.

 

[JKF]

Although I am using London Edinburgh times any improvements could flow though into other services, the main one being London Leeds, but again they will be minimal. If anything London Leeds is the route that would benefit most from a speed up, ideally to below 2hrs, with 2tph is there scope to speed up one of them, fast to Doncaster maybe. faster running Doncaster - Wakefield, I dont know if 125mph would be possible, line is pretty straight but 140mph south of Doncaster isn't going to make much difference on its own either.

I think a ‘headline’ regular timing of under 2hrs for Leeds would be a good marketing point - no idea if this had been achieved in the past. When I was making the journey regularly (10-15 years ago) the faster trains were around 2hr10, suspect the new trains with better acceleration might have trimmed a fraction off that (though aren’t most Leeds services still IC225 stock?). What else could get them under the line? I’ve always thought skipping Wakefield on the faster trains would help, no idea why it warrants a half hourly London train, even with the connections. Also does running east from Leeds to the ECML as once proposed offer any savings?

 

[hexagon789]

I think a ‘headline’ regular timing of under 2hrs for Leeds would be a good marketing point - no idea if this had been achieved in the past. When I was making the journey regularly (10-15 years ago) the faster trains were around 2hr10, suspect the new trains with better acceleration might have trimmed a fraction off that (though aren’t most Leeds services still IC225 stock?). What else could get them under the line? I’ve always thought skipping Wakefield on the faster trains would help, no idea why it warrants a half hourly London train, even with the connections. Also does running east from Leeds to the ECML as once proposed offer any savings?

Same with the 3h59 Edinburgh trains, there were some 1h59 Leeds services.

Again, I believe one was brought back under the Eureka timetable in 2011, and actually 1h59 (as opposed to 2 hours given thay he Edinburgh to London superfast was brought back as 4 hours mot 3h59 and with just one stop not two.)

Edit: it does still exist. 1A07 the 0630 Bradford Forster Square, 0700 off Leeds, is Wakefield Westgate only and into King's Cross at 0859.

 

[greyman42]

As for the Welwyn Viaduct, the speed is limited here due to the aerodynamics in the two tunnels to the north of the station, so the whole project has to include two new tunnels parallel to the existing ones.

What is the issue with the aerodynamics?

 

[zwk500]

Isn’t York-Edinburgh the priority, as it’s used by multiple routes and unlikely to be replaced by full HS even if HS takes London traffic toward the West?
My crayons get twitchy about the part from north of Pegswood (preferably north of Widdrington) to south of Cramlington and quadruple as much of the rest of the way. Get the expresses clear of local trains and allow a proper suburban service (local gains so less local opposition) as well as taking a chunk of time out of the expresses.

THe theory on this is reasonably sound, although building a 250kph line on a new alignment is likely to be cheaper than quad-tracking. Might even be able to serve Alnwick with a parkway on the new line, and then include a connection onto the classic line south of Berwick.

 

[HSTEd]

I think if you were building a line from Newcastle to Edinburgh you are likely to thread through Cottonhopesburnfoot.

It's shorter, and its not as if the coastal settlements are going to be significant enough traffic centres to justify stopping anyway.

 

[snowball]

I think if you were building a line from Newcastle to Edinburgh you are likely to thread through Cottonhopesburnfoot.

It's shorter, and its not as if the coastal settlements are going to be significant enough traffic centres to justify stopping anyway.

I hadn't heard of Cottonhopesburnfoot but I see it's on the A68 near Byrness, a few miles south of the border at Carter Bar.

Were you thinking of making it an extension of the Tweedbank line?

 

[Failed Unit]

Same with the 3h59 Edinburgh trains, there were some 1h59 Leeds services.

Again, I believe one was brought back under the Eureka timetable in 2011, and actually 1h59 (as opposed to 2 hours given thay he Edinburgh to London superfast was brought back as 4 hours mot 3h59 and with just one stop not two.)

Edit: it does still exist. 1A07 the 0630 Bradford Forster Square, 0700 off Leeds, is Wakefield Westgate only and into King's Cross at 0859.

From using the line now, you just can’t get a clean run now. 4 hours to Edinburgh would be possible, but you get all the normal conflict points. Doncaster, Platform at York, Getting stuck behind something slower between Darlington and Newcastle and again in Scotland.

I think the railway is just too busy now and even the 0540 has to have good regulation. I was on the press run, it arrived slightly late because of congestion in the South East, and I think other trains were moved out its way much earlier than normal.

 

[HSTEd]

I hadn't heard of Cottonhopesburnfoot but I see it's on the A68 near Byrness, a few miles south of the border at Carter Bar.

Were you thinking of making it an extension of the Tweedbank line?

Not directly, but simply it is on a more direct route between Edinburgh and Newcastle, and there is a notch cut into the Northumberland National Park for the A68.

The line might use the first section of the Tweedbank line to get out of Edinburgh but I am proposing new construction for the vast majority of the length.

 

[Fazaar1889]

Well over in fact, there's a 91 that made it to 162.8mph.

Do you have any footage?

 

[Sonik]

This is just crayons with a professional badge on it. It’s not a series of bypasses - it’s about 70-80km of new high speed line From Newark (or possibly further west) and somewhere near Temple Hirst

Oh I don't disagree, but it's still not an unreasonable suggestion. The ECML corridor is simply flatter and less inhabited vs the original route. But the devil is always in the detail.

 

[Bald Rick]

What is the issue with the aerodynamics?

The air pressure involved in trains passing each other in a confined space at a closing speed of nearly 400km/h is quite something. Many tunnels have speed restrictions on for this reason, including Watford, Stoke, Peascliffe, Elstree and Kilsby (amongst other reasons). The issue is harder to solve for larger tunnels. But essentially you need very regular pressure relief ducts (some were built for Northchurch and Stowe Hill tunnels during the WCML upgrade), or ideally to have built the tunnel with a larger bore.

 

[Speed43125]

Do you have any footage?

Around 2:33 is where you can see views from the lineside.

 

[Fazaar1889]

Around 2:33 is where you can see views from the lineside.

Jeez, the pantograph was smoking! Thank you!

 

[trebor79]

Jeez, the pantograph was smoking! Thank you!

It's water spray, looks like it was raining.

 

[The Planner]

The air pressure involved in trains passing each other in a confined space at a closing speed of nearly 400km/h is quite something. Many tunnels have speed restrictions on for this reason, including Watford, Stoke, Peascliffe, Elstree and Kilsby (amongst other reasons). The issue is harder to solve for larger tunnels. But essentially you need very regular pressure relief ducts (some were built for Northchurch and Stowe Hill tunnels during the WCML upgrade), or ideally to have built the tunnel with a larger bore.

The thump you hear when a 350 passes a 390 in Kilsby is pretty dramatic at the front.

 

[D6130]

Around 2:33 is where you can see views from the lineside.

Interesting that the flashing green aspects on the fast line signals are clearly visible.

 

[Fazaar1889]

It's water spray, looks like it was raining.

Ah lol whoops. I was still half asleep in bed when I was watching XD

 

[greyman42]

The air pressure involved in trains passing each other in a confined space at a closing speed of nearly 400km/h is quite something. Many tunnels have speed restrictions on for this reason, including Watford, Stoke, Peascliffe, Elstree and Kilsby (amongst other reasons). The issue is harder to solve for larger tunnels. But essentially you need very regular pressure relief ducts (some were built for Northchurch and Stowe Hill tunnels during the WCML upgrade), or ideally to have built the tunnel with a larger bore.

So what would happen, regarding the air pressure, if there was no speed restriction?

 

[D6130]

So what would happen, regarding the air pressure, if there was no speed restriction?

The windows could blow-in!

 

[HSTEd]

So what would happen, regarding the air pressure, if there was no speed restriction?

Structural damage to the train as @D6130 suggests, as well as potential hearing damage to the passengers from overpressure effects.

 

[YourMum666]

I wonder if it could be done by slowly increasing it by +5mph, so sections like Peterborough to just outside Grantham start off at 130mph?

 

[Energy]

I wonder if it could be done by slowly increasing it by +5mph, so sections like Peterborough to just outside Grantham start off at 130mph?

You can't creep up on the laws of physics.

 

[Sonik]

But essentially you need very regular pressure relief ducts (some were built for Northchurch and Stowe Hill tunnels during the WCML upgrade), or ideally to have built the tunnel with a larger bore.

Did the Northchurch pressure relief ducts get built in the end?

There was a lot of NIMBY opposition locally (there's a posh housing estate on top) and I seem to recall it was one of several reasons that Branson's 140mph aspiration got scaled back after Bechtel were brought in. I worked on leaky feeders for WCRM tunnels but I left the company so I don't know what happened in the end with Northchurch.

Bit OT but I guess it does highlight the difficulties with upgrading speed on existing lines.

 

[Bald Rick]

So what would happen, regarding the air pressure, if there was no speed restriction?

Two issues:
passenger comfort on trains that aren’t pressure sealed
potential damage to trains, such as doors losing detection, windows blowing open, curtain sided freight containers getting ripped, etc.

Did the Northchurch pressure relief ducts get built in the end?

Yes, you can see it on Google maps aerial view.

There was a lot of NIMBY opposition locally (there's a posh housing estate on top) and I seem to recall it was one of several reasons that Branson's 140mph aspiration got scaled back after Bechtel were brought in.

It’s not that posh! The work was in hand before Bechtel got involved. IIRC Northchurch wasn’t 140 anyway, as the curve at Berko limited it to 125.

 

[YourMum666]

This might be a bit off topic, but can’t GWML do 140mph, specifically between just outside Acton all the way through to Didcot, as the OHLE was engineered to do it, not sure about ETCS on the GWML though