I see 2 issues with this:
Yes, it probably only works if they / a future government decides to extend HS2 further north after all. Which rather means that local services in the East Midlands are going to be constrained by HS2's presence for years to come.
Add new independent platforms at EMP for Nottingham HS2 trains.
Tbh, for a pure blue-sky exercise, it's not impossible.
I see your excellent crayons and raise you my independent spurs as far as possible towards Derby (orange) and Nottingham (blue) centres. My route via Sinfin saves 14km to Derby versus via EMP. No track changes are required at all around Trent. Split level station at East Midlands Hub with dedicated new high-level platforms for HS2.
Taking out the requirement to serve Derby via EMD certainly makes the track layouts easier there. And the existing Sinfin siding and the old line through Melbourne give a natural route to Derby which seems to be relatively clear of new obstructions. I like it! What do we think the chances are of them taking up this option?
Very good! Although there's no option to split your trains for Derby/Nottingham/Sheffield portions, so would this require 200m trains into Euston?
If by 'them' you mean HS2 ltd/DfT then 0. Derby will not be getting track that wasn't proposed when the stuff that was proposed is being cut back for costs.
At Derby, I think platforms #1 and #2 would be capable of lengthening from approx 330m today to 400m standage without any track changes, although signals would need moving. Chesterfield could be extended to 400m fairly easily at the south end, with removal of some sidings. A remodelling of Sheffield in connection with electrification and resignalling could probably achieve 400m on at least some platforms. East Midlands high-level platforms could be 400m from new, leaving only Nottingham to deal with, where platforms #6 and #7 could probably achieve 400m clear of the A60 bridge, which has some spare openings for a remodelled east end throat junction further east, probably at the cost of the depot to the east, whose land might make a useful small stabling yard for HS trains. Alternatively, Nottingham portions might be split from (say) Macclesfields or Liverpools at Birmingham Interchange.
New alignment needed anyway to maintain grade separation from Castle Donnington freight line
Around 500m radius which should allow a speed of around 60mph speed. Might be eased a little to around 600m radius for a small speed gain if some adjacent property purchased. Grade separation not really relevant as the HS2 spur would become the 'main line' around which other services would be planned and regulated. Melbourne Jn curve is a lot wider than the MML curve in from Spondon just south of Derby station which is approx 170m radius.
That can be served by Nottingham trains. I don't think it needs more than 2 London HS2 trains per hour.
Your blue line into Nottingham would have to go over or through some significant hills, then across a very wide flood-plain - presumably on stilts, and then over some very deep ex gravel pits in Attenborough nature reserve. Looks expensive...
Crossing the valley as close to Beeston as possible should limit impact on the sensitive nature reserve. If technically feasible it is perhaps the only realistic way of widening through Attenborough, as houses have been built very close to the existing double-track railway and you can't create a new alignment on the north side of the river clear of the houses, as that would destroy most of the wetland reserve. From Ashby-de-la-Zouch dropping down to Kegworth is following the original HS2 design anyway:
It's far more likely to be a service to EM Parkway (for HS2 connections and to link two potential development sites) and on to Leicester, which would add very little to congestion at Trent. The tram provides service from Toton into Nottingham, and the Liverpool and Leeds trains are slow enough already without diverting them.
Why do I read this and think there's nothing at all in it for Leeds?
I don't think they got that far. They recognise that trains from HS2 to Nottingham have to pass over Nottingham to Derby flows. But I don't think there's enough distance to get HS2 trains over the Derby line and then under the high-level freight line. And you can't lower the Nottingham-Derby chord without cutting the low-level access to Toton.
Now I have read the full document is there any chance of "First Phase to Leeds" plus either the Newark or Erewash alignments being selected? Or will end up with barely more than the Do Minimum ?
I don't think so. The decision was announced in November with the Integrated Rail Plan. The above paper just gives more details behind that decision. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/integrated-rail-plan-for-the-north-and-the-midlands
Because their isn't. Woeful decision that does more harm than good.
There is zero benefit in that for us in Yorkshire, apart of course from NPR. Which might open when I'm 70 (Sept 2039) if I'm lucky. Thought Shapps said the IRP would bring benefits 15 years earlier than the Eastern leg in full to the North? I can't see many benefits in those timescales
If you're in West Yorkshire sure. NPR does nothing for Sheffield, losing the fast line to Leeds is terrible.
If there are no possible paths south of Bedford (towards Luton) - then surely there aren't too many choices.
