High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[Invincibles]

Its pretty much a given once the line reaches York, if not once it reaches Leeds that all ECML intercity trains north of there will be diverted onto it using Classic Compatible trains.

Also why have you given Newark 2tph and Grantham only 1? Grantham is the larger town.

I gave every station on that line 2, with at least 1 train per hour to link any given pair, or at least that was my aim.

The point of having the slow train continue down from Edinburgh and York on the classic line is that it maintains the connections further south, particularly at Peterborough which actually does not have those connections very often any more.

 

[MK Tom]

That post did lift my spirits a little, but I still have this fear that direct services from Milton Keynes to Manchester are going to get routed via Northampton and stop at everything between Rugby and Stoke-on-Trent. In that case they might as well get London Midland to operate it (or its equivalent at the time), which may well be what they do. That would mean MK, Watford, Rugby and so on passengers can say goodbye to onboard shops, wifi, charge points, table seating and all the other creature comforts of intercity services.

Pretty much everything I say for MK applies equally to Peterborough and the other ECML stops.

 

[pmgarvey]

The point of having the slow train continue down from Edinburgh and York on the classic line is that it maintains the connections further south, particularly at Peterborough which actually does not have those connections very often any more.

If it's slow why bother actually having it go all the way to Edinburgh, when changing at Leeds/York onto HS2 would be quicker.

 

[tbtc]

That post did lift my spirits a little, but I still have this fear that direct services from Milton Keynes to Manchester are going to get routed via Northampton and stop at everything between Rugby and Stoke-on-Trent. In that case they might as well get London Midland to operate it (or its equivalent at the time), which may well be what they do. That would mean MK, Watford, Rugby and so on passengers can say goodbye to onboard shops, wifi, charge points, table seating and all the other creature comforts of intercity services.

Pretty much everything I say for MK applies equally to Peterborough and the other ECML stops.

Northampton is an interesting example, as its somewhere that gets a much poorer service than it really deserves (being on a "branch" off the main line, so reduced to slower services on 350s).

Freeing up capacity on the main line (by HS2) would be a way to give places like Northampton (or Lincoln on the other side) a better service to London etc.

Maybe, since we talk about MK a fair bit, there'd be scope for a direct London service to/from stations on the Bedford - Bletchley branch? (if HS2 freed up capacity)

 

[Nym]

Or from MK to Reading via East-West Rail and Oxford... Perhaps even a service from Manchester Picc, calling selected stations in the valley, all the way down to Heathrow?

 

[Invincibles]

If it's slow why bother actually having it go all the way to Edinburgh, when changing at Leeds/York onto HS2 would be quicker.

To provide better connections and direct journey opportunities. There would be no opportunity to connect at Cross Gates so the only northbound HS2 connection would be at York where I expect most headline services would not call, running via the avoiding lines route instead to avoid the slowness of York station and the rapid stop of York after Cross Gates.

Indeed if the Scottish situation allows continued direct trains from Perth, Dundee or Aberdeen (Inverness if absolutely necessary, but I am unconvinced that would be wired) then the classic ECML train would be that one, as the marginal benefit of sending a HS train up there is very small.

 

[JohnCarlson]

To provide better connections and direct journey opportunities. There would be no opportunity to connect at Cross Gates so the only northbound HS2 connection would be at York where I expect most headline services would not call, running via the avoiding lines route instead to avoid the slowness of York station and the rapid stop of York after Cross Gates.

Indeed if the Scottish situation allows continued direct trains from Perth, Dundee or Aberdeen (Inverness if absolutely necessary, but I am unconvinced that would be wired) then the classic ECML train would be that one, as the marginal benefit of sending a HS train up there is very small.

I find this all a bit odd. I live in Newcastle and I am not at remotely convinced that getting to London Via HS2 would be faster. I( would just stick with the ECML. I think HS2 would be the same or longer. I am aware that the HS2 company is producing figures showing it will be fifty minutes from London to Birmingham, then another forty to Leeds but I don't believe just will be that quick and then don't forger another twenty minutes have to be added on to get from Leeds to York.

Why would you expect anything to stop at Cross Gates and then not stop at York? It is one of the main population centers of the north east and quite wealthy.

John
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If it's slow why bother actually having it go all the way to Edinburgh, when changing at Leeds/York onto HS2 would be quicker.

Why would people from Edinburgh want to change at york to go to London when they have a direct train now?

John
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If it were up to me (which it clearly isn't) I'd go (straight) north from Leeds, not all the way over to York - you'd get a much faster journey going via Ripon etc.

Well you could put a chord in between Leeds and York. Ripon should be reconnected however.

John

 

[pmgarvey]

Why would people from Edinburgh want to change at york to go to London when they have a direct train now?

John

I was referring more to the people travelling between places like Peterborough and stations north of York.

 

[YorkshireBear]

How come the parties have swapped, while in power both parties support current proposed route but while not in power both supported the m40 corridor route... makes no sense. Surely chiltern route is better or party in power wouldnt support it at the time.

 

[ainsworth74]

How come the parties have swapped, while in power both parties support current proposed route but while not in power both supported the m40 corridor route... makes no sense.

That's just how politics works. When you're in opposition you do what's most popular amongst the electorate. Once you're in government you do what is most sensible (or at least what you think is most sensible) for the country as a whole.

 

[Invincibles]

Cross Gates = Roughly where I would locate the HS2 Leeds station

The line running roughly alongside the A1/M1 link road and being HS grade until it meets the ECML at York (and ideally beyond that to just north of York station)

That reduces the 20 minutes a little.

The train will be faster via HS2 because the ECML classic will be slower.

 

[JohnCarlson]

Cross Gates = Roughly where I would locate the HS2 Leeds station

The line running roughly alongside the A1/M1 link road and being HS grade until it meets the ECML at York (and ideally beyond that to just north of York station)

That reduces the 20 minutes a little.

The train will be faster via HS2 because the ECML classic will be slower.

I assume when you are talking of Crossgates you mean a new station not the existing one?

Not sure of the point of having a station there is. To my mind it would need to be at Leeds city center or the whole thing becomes pointless. It would be like having HS2 terminate at Old Oak Common and telling people to jump on the underground if they want to get into London.

Again reducing the speed of the ECML just to force people from the north an HS2 service which is worse than the one they already have now defeats the object of the exercise. I would rather have the money that was going to be spent on HS2 be spent on the ECML.

John

 

[pmgarvey]

Again reducing the speed of the ECML just to force people from the north an HS2 service which is worse than the one they already have now defeats the object of the exercise. I would rather have the money that was going to be spent on HS2 be spent on the ECML.

John

I'm not familiar with the ECML, but are there large sections where there aren't enough paths for commuter/regional trains because InterCity trains are eating up all the paths? If so then after HS2 I wouldn't blame anyone for introducing stops all over the ECML services.

 

[MK Tom]

The whole problem with these extra stops on the E/WCML is that it disadvantages the major population centres on those lines. All anybody seems to care about is Birmingham and Leeds... Yes that is where the major flows go and it's good to try to improve and speed up those journeys but places like MK, Peterborough and all the other major stops on both main lines deserve high speed services too. We deserve limited-stop direct connections not only to London but also to the cities of the north. We don't deserve to become secondary stops on the world's longest commuter branch, bypassed by all the high-speed, high-quality services.

 

[tbtc]

I'm not familiar with the ECML, but are there large sections where there aren't enough paths for commuter/regional trains because InterCity trains are eating up all the paths? If so then after HS2 I wouldn't blame anyone for introducing stops all over the ECML services.

There are a few stations which don't get the level of service that they maybe "deserve" because there's no scope to stop trains there (due to non-stop services eating up paths).

For example, not everything stops at Peterborough, which is a decent sized place (as well as an interchange).

Another point is that some places get a reasonable number of services stopping each hour, but they aren't *that* useful. For example, Newark generally gets two East Coast services an hour, great. But they are generally within about ten minutes of each other (northbound), and only one of them serves Grantham (with a bi-hourly service to Retford). Whilst a London service is obviously useful, stations like Newark don't have a great service to neighbouring stations.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The whole problem with these extra stops on the E/WCML is that it disadvantages the major population centres on those lines. All anybody seems to care about is Birmingham and Leeds... Yes that is where the major flows go and it's good to try to improve and speed up those journeys but places like MK, Peterborough and all the other major stops on both main lines deserve high speed services too. We deserve limited-stop direct connections not only to London but also to the cities of the north. We don't deserve to become secondary stops on the world's longest commuter branch, bypassed by all the high-speed, high-quality services.

This is the problem.

Everyone wants fast trains, as long as those fast trains stop at their local station. How do you square that circle?

If Milton Keynes is big enough for fast trains to stop at then what about Watford? Northampton? Rugby? Tamworth? Stafford? Where do you draw the line...

 

[JohnCarlson]

I'm not familiar with the ECML, but are there large sections where there aren't enough paths for commuter/regional trains because InterCity trains are eating up all the paths? If so then after HS2 I wouldn't blame anyone for introducing stops all over the ECML services.

Well certainly the ECML could do with more capacity but more services are already being added by the removal of some of the well known bottlenecks. Indeed around six trains a day could be running from Lincon to London, the paths are there, but there just isn't any 125 mph stock available to use on them. Much of the ECML passes through open country. Not sure what could be added there.

But my point remains. I am far from convinced that traveling Via HS2 from the north east to London will be faster than the ECML. And why would people from all stations south of York want their journies to London take longer/be more expensive just to fit in a few more local stops.

John
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

All the DfT released documents claim, quite boldy IMO, journey times on HS2 from London to Leeds of 1 hour 20 minutes, so say about 1 hour 45 mins to York.

Bear in mind that the opening of HS2 may come with the deceleration of ECML and WCML services, so that they accomodate more regular stops, smooth out the speed profile of the routes, and generally make HS2 a more attractive proposition.

This actually suggests to me the case for HS2 is built on a fudge, if not a lie. We are told that there is projected to be a shortage of capacity on the Birmingham London section of the WCML so the idea is to build HS2. Then a bit later we are told that trains are going to be diverted from the ECML to run on that new HS2 section.

John

 

[MK Tom]

This is the problem.

Everyone wants fast trains, as long as those fast trains stop at their local station. How do you square that circle?

If Milton Keynes is big enough for fast trains to stop at then what about Watford? Northampton? Rugby? Tamworth? Stafford? Where do you draw the line...

I answered this point earlier; I'd rather have some services miss out MKC because they're serving Rugby or Tamworth and keep our fast journey times to London, Birmingham and Manchester (and preferably gain some to Glasgow because without meaning to boast, MK is the largest urban area between London and Coventry). My point is I'd rather keep the frequency of 1tph and have that train be a fast service with intercity features than have 3tph that have no intercity features and stop everywhere.

EDIT:

I'd much rather have a MKSM parkway station on HS2 though to serve the 800,000 people living in the MK/Northampton/Bedford/Aylesbury area.

 

[JohnCarlson]

I answered this point earlier; I'd rather have some services miss out MKC because they're serving Rugby or Tamworth and keep our fast journey times to London, Birmingham and Manchester (and preferably gain some to Glasgow because without meaning to boast, MK is the largest urban area between London and Coventry). My point is I'd rather keep the frequency of 1tph and have that train be a fast service with intercity features than have 3tph that have no intercity features and stop everywhere.

EDIT:

I'd much rather have a MKSM parkway station on HS2 though to serve the 800,000 people living in the MK/Northampton/Bedford/Aylesbury area.

Well yes I mean how many tph to London do you need, but of those you do the faster the better.

John

 

[deltic]

This actually suggests to me the case for HS2 is built on a fudge, if not a lie. We are told that there is projected to be a shortage of capacity on the Birmingham London section of the WCML so the idea is to build HS2. Then a bit later we are told that trains are going to be diverted from the ECML to run on that new HS2 section.

John

HS2 relieves capacity constraints on the WCML, ECML and MML all of which are projected to be well over capacity by 2035. There is no fudge or lie.

 

[JohnCarlson]

HS2 relieves capacity constraints on the WCML, ECML and MML all of which are projected to be well over capacity by 2035. There is no fudge or lie.

I think an important word there is "projected" I mean OK the population of the UK is probably going to increase loads in the next ten years and within twenty the oil supply may be questioning the viability of many domestic air services. HS2 "could' be a life saver. But so could lots of other ways of spending the money on the rail system.

But, I feel like I have typed these words a million times, if and it seems to be very much an if at this point, the plan was to run HS2 like a McDonalds with double deck trains and very cheap seats I could see it having value. But this does not seem to be the case.

John

 

[Nym]

No plans for fares have even been made yet, speculation isn't going to help is it?

 

[Grimsby town]

Personally I'd put stops on HS2 at mk and Northampton as it works on the Japanese lines. I'd also only run it at 170mph so the stops wouldn't eat in to paths too much. I'd use the Leeds Birmingham Line more for cross-country with a few Nottingham(served via a spur) and Sheffield to London service as well as international services. I'd then start building a bypass, like virgin, on parts of the ECML with the view to creating a full high speed line when the funds allow it.

 

[Nym]

One problem with that Grimsby Town, it's going nowhere near Northampton or Milton Keynes...!

 

[MK Tom]

But there's no reason it can't... The Chilterns route is massively unpopular with the locals and could not have been designed better to set off the area of outstanding natural beauty armies. A route along the M1 corridor would allow an MKSM parkway station, say on the M1 near Newport Pagnell. Alternatively it could parallel the A41 then pass up to the west of MK for a parkway station on the A422 near Old Stratford. The current route has proven a PR disaster and I think a more easterly route with a parkway station for the South Midlands would be considerably more popular.

 

[Nym]

Yep, and it would need to go nearer to a lot of towns so you'd end up with a whole different lot of NIMBYS

 

[MK Tom]

Yep, and it would need to go nearer to a lot of towns so you'd end up with a whole different lot of NIMBYS

Think that's going to happen regardless really. The difference is the number of NIMBYs would be offset by it offering some benefit to them and by it not diving through a sensitive hill range.

 

[stanley T]

stop HS2 now! . This is not Nimbyism, it's just an unecessary waste of money.

The rules have changed. Affordability and capacity, not ultra high speed, when people are strapped for cash (and likely to remain so) and the alternatives (car, plane) are hit by high fuel prices. Reopen GCML for freight to relieve the WCML, and upgrade the route via Lincoln to do the same for the ECML.

 

[MK Tom]

Whilst I'm not a stop HS2 person, merely someone who's out to make it benefit Milton Keynes (and make MK the capital of the universe ) I think reopening the GCML is one of the best things we could do as a country. A purpose-built continental loading gauge main line providing relief capacity for our main lines whilst providing new local connections at the same time. Its closure was the most ill-informed decision in transport history.

 

[Invincibles]

I am well aware that the proposed new station just South East of Cross Gates is not in the centre of Leeds, but that is the point. Engineering lines into city centres is expensive. There is nothing stopping trains going very fast until the reach the "parkway" and then using classical lines to head into the city. This is the tactic that CRH have employed with Shanghai and it makes perfect sense.

While the OOC example is extreme, it is not as extreme as what I would propose, which is a station near Kings Langley on the WCML to let half the trains go from there into Euston, with HS2 continuing around the M25 roughly to connect with HS1 in East London (possibly as part of the new East London development). In a perfect world it would be possible to get trains into Canary Wharf and Stratford, but I do not know how feasible that would be.

I genuinely believe that we are obsessed with the idea people want to go from city centre to city centre, but that is not true, hence the success of Stockport as a station (which in HS terms may as well be Manchester because stopping a train so quickly would have massive time penalties), it has good access for the M60 and is convenient for most of south Manchester to reach.

I do not have the software to run a model, but compare how many people can reach Lymm within a 25 minute drive (or equivalent public transport journey) with how many can reach Manchester City centre. I think the conclusions will support the idea that at least half of HS trains would be better serving a station to the west of Manchester at "Warrington".

Similar exercises would support Toton over Derby/Nottingham, Birmingham International over Coventry or Birmingham etc...

When we plan HS routes we need to think about the cost and the wider interest and not just focus on established centres, which, like Shanghai, can still be served by HS just with trains making 100mph journeys for 10 miles or so at the end of the route.

 

[Nym]

Can I make an petition that we have two HS2 threads, one for actual discussion about HS2, and the other for the likes of stanley T to simply post garbage without any real discussion or content to the post other than complete drivel from someone who doesn't seem to know anything about economic cycles or at a push the UK Transport network.

Invincibles, some good points, I'll get back to them when I have a moment.