High Speed Rail Scotland

[farci]

The distance between Glasgow and Edinburgh is 67 kilometers. It is 49 kilometers from Ealing Broadway to Upminster. High speed rail is not necessary. Furthermore, I thought Scotland wanted to secede from the UK. Why are they suddenly interested in a rail link to a country that they abhor?

I don't want to get political on a site devoted to something as important as rail transport but as a Yankee you would understand the desire of a nation to control is own political future in a truly representative way.
Scots don't 'abhor' English or anyone else for that matter but we are indulging at present in a bit of 'Boston Tea Party-type' fun. Therefore the ability of public transport to deliver more supplies as quickly as possible becomes important

 

[Class 170101]

I think as a United Kingdom (whether that be Scotland, England or Wales) we still need High Speed Rail.

If it reduces the amount of internal flights those slots at our various airports can be used for International flights particularly to emerging markets like the BRIC counties without the need for another Runway to be constructed.

If High Speed Rail can be used to improve links between airports then perhaps particular Airports can focus on short haul dlights leaving others to focus on long haul flights with rail transfer in between.

 

[222ben]

Just nationalise and stop internal flights!

 

[edwin_m]

A 3hr train journey between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh ought to capture most domestic journeys from air, based on what has happened with other city pairs with similar journey times.

However there is also the question of passengers interlining at Heathrow to international flights, which I believe is one reason the Scots wish to retain slots at Heathrow rather than a different London airport. Even with a 3hr journey to Heathrow via any HS2 Heathrow link, once check-in times are allowed it will be at least 5hr from leaving Glasgow or Edinburgh to takeoff from Heathrow. A 2hr check-in at Edinburgh/Glasgow airport, then a 30min flight and a 1hr transfer at Heathrow would considerably shorten this time.

Thus passengers from Scotland transferring to long-haul at Heathrow will probably still want a connecting flight instead of a train, and their choice of flight would be reduced if most domestic passengers were on the train instead. Perhaps the answer to that is to assume (accept) that Heathrow is no longer a hub airport for Scotland, and that Scottish passengers will go via CDG or Schipol instead.

 

[najaB]

Perhaps the answer to that is to assume (accept) that Heathrow is no longer a hub airport for Scotland, and that Scottish passengers will go via CDG or Schipol instead.

It's more accurate to say that Heathrow is no longer the hub for Scottish passengers, but one of many (LHR, CDG, AMS, BHM and AUH at the very least).

 

[Paule23]

The thing to note is the very large volume of air passengers between Edinburgh / Glasgow and London. The more you reduce the journey time towards 3 hours the more passengers you can gain for high speed rail.



So a full HS Rail line to Carlisle is not needed. All you need is enough high speed sections to bypass congested / slow sections of the existing line and decrease journey times fromthe 3.38 phase 2b time down towards 3 hours.



So if 2 Scottish sections saved 10-15 mins each the journey time would be down to around 3.15. Then one further high speed section anywhere between Wigan and Carlisle would suffice to give a 3 hour journey time.



Even at 3.15 or so the numbers attracted to High Speed Rail would be significant.

I don't get the maths here. Most Glasgow/Edinburgh - London trains are at least 4h30, lop off 30 mins and we're still at 4 hours?

 

[clc]

I don't get the maths here. Most Glasgow/Edinburgh - London trains are at least 4h30, lop off 30 mins and we're still at 4 hours?

You'd be taking 30 mins off the post phase 2 time of 3h38m.

 

[class26]

It's more accurate to say that Heathrow is no longer the hub for Scottish passengers, but one of many (LHR, CDG, AMS, BHM and AUH at the very least).

Wrong airport code I think? BHM is Birmingham Shuttleworth airport, Alabama. BHX is Birmingham UK

 

[najaB]

Wrong airport code I think? BHM is Birmingham Shuttleworth airport, Alabama. BHX is Birmingham UK

You are correct. Was thinking of the CRS code for New Street.

 

[route:oxford]

A 2hr check-in at Edinburgh/Glasgow airport, then a 30min flight and a 1hr transfer at Heathrow would considerably shorten this time.

A 30 minute flight from EDI to LHR? If only...

They are scheduled for 1h25m, and are sometimes quicker. But more often than not closer to the 2 hours from backing up at EDI to exiting arrivals.

Then you'll need to allow a minimum connection time of 60-90 minutes depending on terminal changes.

At least check in at EDI is quick shame about your hand luggage disappears out of site.

 

[edwin_m]

A 30 minute flight from EDI to LHR? If only...

They are scheduled for 1h25m, and are sometimes quicker. But more often than not closer to the 2 hours from backing up at EDI to exiting arrivals.

Then you'll need to allow a minimum connection time of 60-90 minutes depending on terminal changes.

At least check in at EDI is quick shame about your hand luggage disappears out of site.

My time estimates were a bit top of the head, but the connecting flight would still be quicker than the train assuming you didn't need to collect and re-check baggage and re-clear security at Heathrow. I don't know if that's possible now but it would be possible in future if someone wanted to do it enough.

 

[clc]

Transport Scotland said a major announcement was expected this month:

http://www.transport.gov.scot/project/high-speed-rail

Not much longer to wait then!

 

[clc]

Announcement now expected this month before Purdah begins on 24 March:

"“The time is nigh” for Anglo-Scottish high-speed rail, according to Greengauge 21 Director Jim Steer, ahead of speculation that there will be a joint Holyrood/Westminster announcement on the subject this month.
Steer told RAIL that England to southern Scotland is “where the advantages of shorter journey times are so palpable and where there’s a huge domestic air market to address”. But he says that so far we have only seen hesitation for what would be a “truly national high-speed rail network”.

He says there have been leaks about a poor business case for extending high-speed lines to Scotland from a study commissioned in October 2012, but that these go against the findings of studies carried out by both Network Rail and Greengauge 21.

Cabinet Secretary for Infrastructure, Investment and Cities Keith Brown MSP hinted at the potential March announcement at an invite-only conference in Newcastle on February 17. A March announcement would fall safely ahead of the purdah period (beginning on March 24) that will precede the Scottish Parliamentary elections (May 5).

Jim Steer will present a full analysis of the options and considerations for Anglo-Scottish high-speed in RAIL 796, published on March 16
For more on this story read RAIL 795 published on March 2"

http://www.railmagazine.com/news/ne...-urges-truly-national-high-speed-rail-network

 

[Ironside]

Well that sounds a lot more positive. Hopefully they could get on with it after phase 2.

 

[Haydn1971]

Has anyone in HS2 actually said a national network wouldn't happen ? All I've seen is that HS2 is going to be the Y shaped network. We are already talking HS3 and Scotland is already talking Central Belt - the logical next step is linking the lines via WCML, the next logical step is a route to the west but that could be 2040-2050 onwards in my mind. It just wouldn't be HS2 building it, it would be some other company set up to build each line.

 

[Altnabreac]

Well that sounds a lot more positive. Hopefully they could get on with it after phase 2.

I'm sure that the Scottish Government's timescale for this is not "After Phase 2". More like "In parallel with Phase 1".

 

[TBY-Paul]

Has anyone in HS2 actually said a national network wouldn't happen ? All I've seen is that HS2 is going to be the Y shaped network. We are already talking HS3 and Scotland is already talking Central Belt - the logical next step is linking the lines via WCML, the next logical step is a route to the west but that could be 2040-2050 onwards in my mind. It just wouldn't be HS2 building it, it would be some other company set up to build each line.

Why is the next logical step to link via WCML. We seam to be in a position where HS3 has superseded any HS2 (Stage 3)ideas. Now depending on what HS3 ends up doing, that would determine the route to Scotland.

Theoretically, we could end up with HS3 linking Manchester to Leeds via a Delta Junction at Barnsley, with HS3 being extended, in some shape or form, northbound to Newcastle ( sorry I forget which option number these were in one of the published reports). If HS3 decided to go down this route, then Scotland could be in a position where the nearest/shortest link point to the High speed network would be somewhere near Newcastle rather than somewhere near Preston.

I do think having HS3 in the mix, rather than just discussing HS2(stage3) makes things a little less straight forward.

 

[Haydn1971]

I've already spoke of the Barnsley-Manchester line for HS3 - it's something in the dialogue of the people involved with HS3 (or whatever the name is this month), people I have worked with in the past.

WCML is logical over ECML due to the eastings of Edinburgh - ie further west than Liverpool.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Why is the next logical step to link via WCML. We seam to be in a position where HS3 has superseded any HS2 (Stage 3)ideas. Now depending on what HS3 ends up doing, that would determine the route to Scotland.

Theoretically, we could end up with HS3 linking Manchester to Leeds via a Delta Junction at Barnsley, with HS3 being extended, in some shape or form, northbound to Newcastle ( sorry I forget which option number these were in one of the published reports). If HS3 decided to go down this route, then Scotland could be in a position where the nearest/shortest link point to the High speed network would be somewhere near Newcastle rather than somewhere near Preston.

I do think having HS3 in the mix, rather than just discussing HS2(stage3) makes things a little less straight forward.

No. It's no easier to get to Scotland in an economically worthwhile way from Newcastle than it is from Preston. HS3 would never mean building a new 400km/h line to Newcastle anyway. The ambition in the NE is to build a new line from Darlington to Newcastle but this would be limited to 230km/h as it would be used by all express classic services which don't need to call at Durham. If built, it would be built to GC loading gauge so that it could be used by captive trains in future, but trains would not need to run any faster. It's just like how the captive spurs into the other cities are limited to 230km/h - the extra expense of increasing linespeed through a non-empty area (which describes County Durham reasonably well) is not worth the few minutes of journey time saving that you would get as a result. HS2 trains to Newcastle will already be faster than air so there's little gain to be had dropping a few more minutes from the timings. HS2 trains to Scotland will be competing against air, so it's worthwhile ensuring that they can run as fast as possible, even through the relatively built up area between Liverpool and Manchester.

 

[TBY-Paul]

No. It's no easier to get to Scotland in an economically worthwhile way from Newcastle than it is from Preston. HS3 would never mean building a new 400km/h line to Newcastle anyway. The ambition in the NE is to build a new line from Darlington to Newcastle but this would be limited to 230km/h as it would be used by all express classic services which don't need to call at Durham. If built, it would be built to GC loading gauge so that it could be used by captive trains in future, but trains would not need to run any faster. It's just like how the captive spurs into the other cities are limited to 230km/h - the extra expense of increasing linespeed through a non-empty area (which describes County Durham reasonably well) is not worth the few minutes of journey time saving that you would get as a result. HS2 trains to Newcastle will already be faster than air so there's little gain to be had dropping a few more minutes from the timings. HS2 trains to Scotland will be competing against air, so it's worthwhile ensuring that they can run as fast as possible, even through the relatively built up area between Liverpool and Manchester.

My Bold, I'd be interested to read where this information comes from, from what I can glean, there seams to be total apathy emanating from our local authorities when it comes to things related to HS2/HS3. It's almost as though the area will settle for what ever is given to them, rather than getting involved in the consultation process.

I found this group as a result of doing search's when it was first mentioned in one of the early reports that HS2 could/would be extended to Newcastle/Northward and that in all likelihood a Tees Valley Interchange station should/would be included, in the future plans.The thought of having a New "Tees Valley Interchange" was an exciting prospect, it would be a game changer to the economy of Teesside, if it was put in the right place. I've brought the subject of a "Tees Valley Interchange" in few threads.But in the three years I've been a member I've come to the conclusion that Teesside is considered to be an inconvenience to the rail network, an area that unnecessarily slows travel time down, when you could be arriving at other locations 3-4 mins earlier.

It doesn't help that the area all so suffers from having local authorities who are quite happy to wallow in self pity, so long as they can blame the Conservatives for all the area's ills, thus ensuring Labour MP's are elected.

Since the early HS2 reports were published, it's looks like any possibility of having a new High speed line between York and Newcastle that would include a new Tees Valley Interchange seams to have been removed from any future plans. Instead the area will have to settle for a small upgrade to the ECML, with some minor changes at Darlington.

So to go back to my original point. If the original ideas of HS2(Stage3), a High Speed line from Swillington northward towards Newcastle (with a Tees Valley Interchange) were taken on board by HS3(northern power house line or whatever it's called this month), then there is a possibility that Newcastle could be the closest piece of High Speed line to Scotland. Obviously now that the NE has been downgraded to be an insignificant area of the country, I'll concede that WCML is the most likely route in which to link up a High Speed Rail Line in Scotland.

 

[Haydn1971]

My Bold, I'd be interested to read where this information comes from, from what I can glean, there seams to be total apathy emanating from our local authorities when it comes to things related to HS2/HS3. It's almost as though the area will settle for what ever is given to them, rather than getting involved in the consultation process.

I've seen this limited improvement mentioned before - seem to recall it being in a Transport for the North document - again, knowing people who have written blurb for that document, I'd suggest it's a very early stage opinion based on little or even no economic appraisal - i.e. Can you write some on this, I need it in an hour type work

 

[NotATrainspott]

My Bold, I'd be interested to read where this information comes from, from what I can glean, there seams to be total apathy emanating from our local authorities when it comes to things related to HS2/HS3. It's almost as though the area will settle for what ever is given to them, rather than getting involved in the consultation process.

I found this group as a result of doing search's when it was first mentioned in one of the early reports that HS2 could/would be extended to Newcastle/Northward and that in all likelihood a Tees Valley Interchange station should/would be included, in the future plans.The thought of having a New "Tees Valley Interchange" was an exciting prospect, it would be a game changer to the economy of Teesside, if it was put in the right place. I've brought the subject of a "Tees Valley Interchange" in few threads.But in the three years I've been a member I've come to the conclusion that Teesside is considered to be an inconvenience to the rail network, an area that unnecessarily slows travel time down, when you could be arriving at other locations 3-4 mins earlier.

It doesn't help that the area all so suffers from having local authorities who are quite happy to wallow in self pity, so long as they can blame the Conservatives for all the area's ills, thus ensuring Labour MP's are elected.

Since the early HS2 reports were published, it's looks like any possibility of having a new High speed line between York and Newcastle that would include a new Tees Valley Interchange seams to have been removed from any future plans. Instead the area will have to settle for a small upgrade to the ECML, with some minor changes at Darlington.

So to go back to my original point. If the original ideas of HS2(Stage3), a High Speed line from Swillington northward towards Newcastle (with a Tees Valley Interchange) were taken on board by HS3(northern power house line or whatever it's called this month), then there is a possibility that Newcastle could be the closest piece of High Speed line to Scotland. Obviously now that the NE has been downgraded to be an insignificant area of the country, I'll concede that WCML is the most likely route in which to link up a High Speed Rail Line in Scotland.

The original HS2 Ltd reports did include a full captive line to Newcastle as one of the initial options but it's not going to be worthwhile for a very long time. The extremely straight and flat ECML is four-track between York and Northallerton and it would be possible to get more capacity out of this section without needing a whole new line. The line between Darlington and Newcastle is more of a problem, since it's only two track and has to be shared between express ECML services and freight. By building a bypass line, you can speed up services which bypass Durham while allowing local and freight services to run without holding up express trains.

The plans for HS2 to Scotland are almost certainly going to be incremental, with new bypass sections built bit-by-bit to decrease journey times and increase capacity. That locks in the choice of the WCML corridor, as an incremental scheme couldn't stray very far from the existing line or it wouldn't be able to be phased correctly. In the short term, you can get a lot more bang for your buck spending money on these WCML bypasses than you would if the scheme were based on the ECML.

 

[Agent_c]

Has anyone in HS2 actually said a national network wouldn't happen ? All I've seen is that HS2 is going to be the Y shaped network. We are already talking HS3 and Scotland is already talking Central Belt - the logical next step is linking the lines via WCML, the next logical step is a route to the west but that could be 2040-2050 onwards in my mind. It just wouldn't be HS2 building it, it would be some other company set up to build each line.

HS2 is linked to the WCML....

 

[edwin_m]

There's also the point that if you aim for a 3hr journey London to Edinburgh the journey time to Glasgow (even with HS infrastructure linking the two) isn't going to improve significantly on the 3hr 38min promised via HS2 to Golborne and WCML northwards. So the ECML route needs to achieve a much greater time saving to realise any benefit for the western half of the Central Belt.

 

[clc]

There's also the point that if you aim for a 3hr journey London to Edinburgh the journey time to Glasgow (even with HS infrastructure linking the two) isn't going to improve significantly on the 3hr 38min promised via HS2 to Golborne and WCML northwards. So the ECML route needs to achieve a much greater time saving to realise any benefit for the western half of the Central Belt.

There's no way the Scottish Govt would sign off on any route which gave Edinburgh a half hour journey time advantage over Glasgow. Glasgow and Edinburgh will need to have similar journey times to London.

 

[Haydn1971]

HS2 is linked to the WCML....

Context ! Meaning linking HS2 to HS in Scotland via HS line along the corridor of the WCML - i.e. A 360-400kph link between the two discrete HS Networks

 

[Altnabreac]

Nicola Sturgeon says High Speed Rail Scotland announcement will be "in the not too distant future".

http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...P_would_continue_small_business_bonus_scheme/

Given Purdah starts on Thursday I'd expect it to be early this week.

 

[matacaster]

A 3hr train journey between London and Glasgow/Edinburgh ought to capture most domestic journeys from air, based on what has happened with other city pairs with similar journey times.

However there is also the question of passengers interlining at Heathrow to international flights, which I believe is one reason the Scots wish to retain slots at Heathrow rather than a different London airport. Even with a 3hr journey to Heathrow via any HS2 Heathrow link, once check-in times are allowed it will be at least 5hr from leaving Glasgow or Edinburgh to takeoff from Heathrow. A 2hr check-in at Edinburgh/Glasgow airport, then a 30min flight and a 1hr transfer at Heathrow would considerably shorten this time.

Thus passengers from Scotland transferring to long-haul at Heathrow will probably still want a connecting flight instead of a train, and their choice of flight would be reduced if most domestic passengers were on the train instead. Perhaps the answer to that is to assume (accept) that Heathrow is no longer a hub airport for Scotland, and that Scottish passengers will go via CDG or Schipol instead.

Perhaps for many destinations, Manchecher Airport is a better bet than Heathrow for Scots. Train times better too!

 

[Agent_c]

Context ! Meaning linking HS2 to HS in Scotland via HS line along the corridor of the WCML - i.e. A 360-400kph link between the two discrete HS Networks

Part of the advantage of HS2 is that it doesn't use the existing route, mapping a route that is more friendly to high speed trains.

 

[clc]

Scotland On Sunday is reporting that a deal has been done to get Scotland-London journey times down to 3 hours:

http://www.scotsman.com/regions/edi...d-london-train-times-to-three-hours-1-4077092