High Speed Two (HS2) discussion

[LE Greys]

Fewer stations equal fewer passengers, it's not exactly difficult to understand and we're not talking all shacks so don't even think about it.

Lower connectivity gives the same problem. I'm not suggesting that HS2 should have stations at Braunston and Willoughby or Ashby Magna, just that it should be possible to travel from the centre of Sheffield to the centre of London or the centre of Newcastle via HS2 without having to change trains. Remove rail's biggest advantages, rapid journeys from city centre to city centre and the fact that the same train can serve lots of places, and you start to lose passengers. Remove the other big advantages, walk-up fares and ease of access (in other words, the ability to turn up and go) then that puts more people off. I want HS2 to be a success! The way it's going, it won't be!

 

[Philip Elliott]

Spot on LE Greys.


By the way, it is Braunston unless you want a station on that vile council estate in Leicester The road through Ashby Magna was shut recently - they may well have been removing the bridge (which had already been infilled), will need to check

 

[class26]

Has onyone on here travelled on the Spanish high speed line between Madrid and Barcelona ? They sovle the problem of city centres by having by passes at each city so non stop trains do not get slowed on the "classic" network into the city, only stoppers use this. That surely is the way to do it ?

but this destroys the benefits for a lot of the regional cities. If, to get a train to Newcastle, I have to get to, say, Micklefield, I have to go into Leeds, change for a stopper to Micklefield, then change again. All the while a fast XC service will have zoomed up to York and beyond. If you assume a 15 minute change at Mickelfield, and that it takes an extra 15 minutes to get there on a stopper, the XC service effectively has a 30 minute head start. So for getting into Newcastle 5-10 minutes earlier at the cost of a lot more hassle and increased ticket price, it's pointless.

I hate to admit it, but AGHAST have a point-if HS2 doesn't serve city centres it's going to become a massive, stations-in-beet-fields white elephant.

HS2 needs to run Euston-Sheffield Victoria-Leeds Crown Point-Newcastle City Centre-Edinburgh City Centre.

The only other option is to have massive 'over provision' through point-to-point running, i.e. Leeds City to Sheffield Midland via HS2, but given the additional time costs of getting out of the city, in the wrong direction, to a station in the middle of nowhere, will destroy the time savings necessary to affect modal shift and create additional capacity.

Currently HS2 is being built as a London-Birmingham line, and is being built for London City Centre-Birmingham City centre travel. But Sheffield CC-Leeds CC, and Leeds CC-Newcastle CC are also important journeys that need to be provided for, and the only way to do that is to run through city centres.

And yes, that does mean you can't run trains through stations at 250mph-and you know what, I'm fine with that.

Were we to take an East Coast route to its logical extent, I really don't see the problem with Running London-Aberdeen with a calling pattern of Sheffield, Leeds, Newcastle, Edinburgh, Dundee, Aberdeen.

When running 18 coach long trains you don't need 4tph (particularly on the London-Leeds section, which, according to current models, would be 72 coaches ph-quadruple the current number).

This should be compatible with the 'core' London-Birmingham section, if you run non-stop through it. If you run an hourly call at Bham International and an hourly to Bham CC, you can fit your number of trains through.

 

[LE Greys]

Has onyone on here travelled on the Spanish high speed line between Madrid and Barcelona ? They sovle the problem of city centres by having by passes at each city so non stop trains do not get slowed on the "classic" network into the city, only stoppers use this. That surely is the way to do it ?

That's not a bad idea, an extension of the avoiding line principle.

Spot on LE Greys.


By the way, it is Braunston unless you want a station on that vile council estate in Leicester The road through Ashby Magna was shut recently - they may well have been removing the bridge (which had already been infilled), will need to check

Thanks (and will be edited).

 

[daniel3982]

Has onyone on here travelled on the Spanish high speed line between Madrid and Barcelona ? They sovle the problem of city centres by having by passes at each city so non stop trains do not get slowed on the "classic" network into the city, only stoppers use this. That surely is the way to do it ?

That would be my idea scenario too, high speed lines that bypass cities but new lines passing through (perhaps on old alignments or alongside existing alignments) the city centres so that stopping services serve the city but you can run quicker direct services too.

The fact they've been able to thread high speed lines alongside classic lines (of two different gauges) into Spanish cities with incredibly mountainous terrain and that are far higher density than British cities (such as Malaga & Sevilla) suggests that it is easily possible in Britain, but the govt is choosing not to for some reason (to save money I guess).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I wouldn't disagree. However, the pressing need for increasing line capacity - especially for commuter services into London - will be a constraint on greatly increasing line speed. The best hourly current Sheffield - London time appears to be around 2 hours. I would be surprised if that came down much with electrification, the main benefit to passengers being increased choice of destinations (through increased numbers of stops) rather than through increased line speed.

The supposed virtue of high speed rail is that by taking fast intercity services off the old mainline, they reduce the peak-period conflict between non-stop direct services, and stopper commuter services - hence allowing many more commuter and regional trains to run and so increasing line capacity and destination choice.

But I would agree that electrification is essential; so that electrified commuter services with high acceleration can use lines together with stopper regional services.

I suppose if Sheffield/Derby/Nottingham found that the journey times remained the same but there was increased stops that there wouldn't be any net loss really (although you'd need longer trains), the damage comes if it's downgraded in the same way that say Nuneaton to London has been post WCML improvements, where other than 1 peak-time service it's intercity connection has been severed and replaced with a much slower London Midland service via Northampton, Long Buckby, Wolverton etc.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The main long distance flow on the MML is from Leicester to London and since HS2 conveniently misses it, there will be very little scope for reducing the amount of non-stop running. Frankly there is no need for anymore departures from St. Pancras - the use of suitable length trains and replacing removed track further north is all that is required.

Let's hope that the idiots don't declare that people from Leicester need to travel north to Radcliffe-on-Sour to connect with HS2 if they want anything other than an all stations local service into London taking an extra hour!

 

[nerd]

18tph is only for south of Kingsbury. The eastern arm will be 9-10tph so any alterations suggested would not have a detrimental effect enough to not run this level of service.

no; the two separated arms have to run precisely in phase along their full length; if a trainset from Lime Street is a minute late joining the western arm, then the corresponding trainsets on the eastern arm will also have to delay a minute. in effect the whole system going southwards has to be able to accommodate 18tph.

Fewer stations equal fewer passengers, it's not exactly difficult to understand and we're not talking all shacks so don't even think about it.

HS2's contention is that that is true for regional rail and for commuter services; but false for high speed rail. They believe that - on high speed rail - higher speed and higher capacity equals more passengers, because they believe that there is massive unfilled demand for intercity high speed travel at the moment; and that there will be still more unfilled demand for intercity high speed travel by 2030. So limiting the number of stations served on the high speed line will increase both the capacity of the system, and its end-to-end speed; and hence increase the number of passengers carried. Conversely, increasing the number of stations stopped at on regional and classic rail, while reducing the end-to-end speed, will increase destination options; and so again will increase passengers. Passenger numbers on high speed rail are held to be primarily determined by capacity and speed; passengers on regional rail prmarily by connectivity and frequency.

What is good for high speed rail is, HS2 believe, bad for regional and commuter rail. Which is why they see it as most important to separate the two into completely different systems, so that their contrary requirements no longer conflict with one another.

Which is great if you live in London, Brum, Manc or Leeds - who in effect form the premier league cities who are going to generate the overwhelming majority of high speed rail trips. Contriwise it is bad news for towns and cities that will now be served only by regional or classic rail - Stoke (unless they can wheedle an interchange station), Hull.

Then there will be a larger number of towns or cities who don't qualify for the premier service, but still get some access to HS2 via classic-compatible services (Liverpool, Newcastle, Preston, York); or via more or less distant interchange stations (Leicester, Derby, Notts, Sheffield, Rotherham). The classic-compatible services in particular have an ambivalent functional model, being non-stop while on the high speed line, but being stoppers while on the classic lines. They are getting half a loaf; but that is better than getting no HSR services at all.

It isn't fair; but then it isn't HS2's job to be fair, it is their job to fill trains; and if they can best do that by restricting the premier service to a very few cities, and running very frequent and very long trainsets inbetween them, then that is what they will do.

As to whether HS2 are right, or you are right; we may never know. But if they do manage to fill the trains they run with the business model that they have developed, then I won't be complaining much; even though I would prfer in principle their building a dedicated spur and terminal station into Sheffield city centre.

 

[class26]

That would be my idea scenario too, high speed lines that bypass cities but new lines passing through (perhaps on old alignments or alongside existing alignments) the city centres so that stopping services serve the city but you can run quicker direct services too.

The fact they've been able to thread high speed lines alongside classic lines (of two different gauges) into Spanish cities with incredibly mountainous terrain and that are far higher density than British cities (such as Malaga & Sevilla) suggests that it is easily possible in Britain, but the govt is choosing not to for some reason (to save money I guess).
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Afraid I haven`t had time to read all the blurb on HS2 but do we know yet that it ISN`T the intention to follow Spanish practise which does work so well ? When I wrote my last comment I hadn`t considered the point about the gauges but I guess they have relaid or rather constructed new links into existing stations. These bypasses leave the main line several miles outside a town, enough to allow for a gradual deceleration, rejoining I would say about 5 miles clear of the town but then Spain, like France does have lots of land whereax we would probably struggle in this respect, certainly in the southern half of England. If we do not intend to follow this practise then I guess what is involved is a series of park and ride stations but as I say, I havent read all the blurb so please correct of wrong

 

[WatcherZero]

Ive always believed getting a basic functioning network up and running and you can find money later for 'extras' such as expensive diversions, spurs, etc...

 

[HSTEd]

I hear stories about the BCR for Stage 1 being revised down again to 1.2 and the full project to 1.9?

Anyone have any news on that front?

 

[nerd]

I hear stories about the BCR for Stage 1 being revised down again to 1.2 and the full project to 1.9?

Anyone have any news on that front?

Yes; news reports in papers at the moment.

Effectively what they are doing is stripping out all 'external' benefit terms; so that they are including in the BCR only those benefits that are very strictly related to the specific HSR project. This has been reported as correcting an 'error', but that appears to be spin from a hostile journalist, rather than an admission from DfT or HS2 ltd.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/apr/11/railways-hs2-fewer-economic-benefits?newsfeed=true

The 'wider' economic benefits - specifically economic gain from reduced congestion into London, Manc, Leeds and Brum; and scope for improved frequency and connectivity of regional rail services - are now reckoned separately, outside the strict BCR calculation.

The recalibration appears to be mainly related to the prospect for judicial review. Because the 'wider' benefits are much less readily quantifiable, DfT faced having to justify figures in court that had a very wide margin of confidence and scope for differential interpretation. Stripping the calculus down to the strict project-specific benefits would reduce the possibility of protracted argument about inherently imprecise numbers.

 

[tbtc]

It isn't fair; but then it isn't HS2's job to be fair, it is their job to fill trains; and if they can best do that by restricting the premier service to a very few cities, and running very frequent and very long trainsets inbetween them, then that is what they will do.

As to whether HS2 are right, or you are right; we may never know. But if they do manage to fill the trains they run with the business model that they have developed, then I won't be complaining much; even though I would prfer in principle their building a dedicated spur and terminal station into Sheffield city centre

Ive always believed getting a basic functioning network up and running and you can find money later for 'extras' such as expensive diversions, spurs, etc...

I agree with both of you - I might have designed HS2 differently, but I can see why they are trying to do what they plan, and realistically there's time to sort out the "optional extras" at a later date. Just hurry up and build it!

 

[nick.c]

Ive always believed getting a basic functioning network up and running and you can find money later for 'extras' such as expensive diversions, spurs, etc...

Although a strong supporter of HS2 Phase 1, until recently I had doubts about the efficacy of Phase 2 – the Y-Shaped extension. Party because 18 TPH seemed overly optimistic for one HSL and partly because 18 TPH wouldn’t be quite enough to serve all major city centres. In my laymen’s view the UK would be better served by two separate north-south HSLs, serving both sides of the Pennines and each running 12 TPH. However Professor McNaughton (HS2 Chief Engineer) was recently quoted as saying that HS2 could handle trains with 2 minute headways. Assuming a real world railway would never operate at more than 80% potential that still means 24 TPH. Making this possible is the combination of advanced signalling systems, uniform performance between Old Oak and Birmingham Interchange plus the fact that from a point just south of Birmingham Interchange, HS2 is effectively a 4-track railway.
The significance is that if these extra trains could be run then both Nottingham and Sheffield CITY CENTRES could easily be provided with 2 TPH HS2 services to London. Whether this would be full 400m units or perhaps 200m units after splitting at East Midlands Interchange would depend on passenger demand. This would mean that East Midlands and South Yorkshire Interchanges would be ADDITIONAL to HS2 services from the classic city centre stations and perhaps would attract passengers from a wider geographical area. The reality is that HS2 offers phenomenal capacity if it’s used to the full.

 

[HSTEd]

Although a strong supporter of HS2 Phase 1, until recently I had doubts about the efficacy of Phase 2 – the Y-Shaped extension. Party because 18 TPH seemed overly optimistic for one HSL and partly because 18 TPH wouldn’t be quite enough to serve all major city centres. In my laymen’s view the UK would be better served by two separate north-south HSLs, serving both sides of the Pennines and each running 12 TPH. However Professor McNaughton (HS2 Chief Engineer) was recently quoted as saying that HS2 could handle trains with 2 minute headways. Assuming a real world railway would never operate at more than 80% potential that still means 24 TPH. Making this possible is the combination of advanced signalling systems, uniform performance between Old Oak and Birmingham Interchange plus the fact that from a point just south of Birmingham Interchange, HS2 is effectively a 4-track railway.
The significance is that if these extra trains could be run then both Nottingham and Sheffield CITY CENTRES could easily be provided with 2 TPH HS2 services to London. Whether this would be full 400m units or perhaps 200m units after splitting at East Midlands Interchange would depend on passenger demand. This would mean that East Midlands and South Yorkshire Interchanges would be ADDITIONAL to HS2 services from the classic city centre stations and perhaps would attract passengers from a wider geographical area. The reality is that HS2 offers phenomenal capacity if it’s used to the full.

Indeed the potential for 24-30tph with 1200 seats per trainset makes it have mroe capacity than all three north-south main lines, however if you want the OOC and Birmingham int trains spread over the hour rather than all in one "pulse" then things become rather more troublesome.

 

[nick.c]

Indeed the potential for 24-30tph with 1200 seats per trainset makes it have mroe capacity than all three north-south main lines, however if you want the OOC and Birmingham int trains spread over the hour rather than all in one "pulse" then things become rather more troublesome.

No probs. All trains will call at OOC to provide access to Crossrail. Birmingham Interchange is a bit more complex but here effectively the line splits into 3 - Birmingham City Centre branch, North West branch and North East branch - so there's no problem fitting in stopping trains. Same coming south with all three branches feeling into the Birmingham to London core. However you're right as synchronising movements through Birmingham Interchange is the key. HS2 is different to a typical 2-track Japanese line with intermediate stations as HS2 will be 4-track from just south of Birmingham Interchange for a number of miles to the junction where the north-west and north-east branches diverge. This provides loads of extra capacity and flexibility.

 

[daniel3982]

Won't trains not stopping at Birmingham Interchange southbound run into the back of any services that do stop?

 

[DXMachina]

I'd imagine scheduling will be set up so that stoppers start immediately AFTER non-stoppers rather than just before...

Also: Signalling usually prevents that.

 

[Nym]

Won't trains not stopping at Birmingham Interchange southbound run into the back of any services that do stop?

No, all platforms are on loops at Birmingham Interchange.

In addition to this, it is a four track approach from the North, so conflict free access is available to the platforms from the NE and Birmingham Branch while NW services can run through, or also have a service diverge onto the outer tracks to call while the service behind will run fast through.

PS: Forgive the poor spelling if I havn't realised, but we don't have spell checkers on UoM computers and I don't have admin privalages to install one.

 

[HSTEd]

Is there definately a four track section between Birmingham International and the junction complex? (Its not really a delta, its a delta with a triangle tacked on...all flying junctions, should look rather impressive).

 

[daniel3982]

Does the loop run some distance to the south as it'll take some minutes for these units to get up to top speed, so difficult to see how they could get 18tph onto the system without getting the stopping services upto speed on a loop before sending them in front of non-stopping services.

 

[HSTEd]

Does the loop run some distance to the south as it'll take some minutes for these units to get up to top speed, so difficult to see how they could get 18tph onto the system without getting the stopping services upto speed on a loop before sending them in front of non-stopping services.

Remember the signalling system allows trains to start rolling a few seconds after the previous fast train passes through, which gives them 2-3 minutes before the target "path" hits the station.

A shinkansen can do 0-170mph in three minutes so would be able to do it easily and apparently a European set can do it in the time frame as well.

Any loops can be suprisingly short if you accept the 21 paths per hour target (and don't aim higher - 30 paths per hour or somesuch).

 

[WatcherZero]

Word is Government has launched a review into whether the £4bn optimism bias (reserve) is excessive.

 

[vtiman]

yes apparently some other infrastructure schemes/projects have had their costs reduced by merely removing this bias.

it never seemed like a good idea to me to include possible cost escalations in any such schemes as they effectively will become the actual cost. usually any business or government department will spend all their allocated budgets because if you don't you get less in the next budget period. why would contractors build the first stage of hs2 for say £12 billion if they knew that up to £17 billion was available ? it is an enormous amount of money - presumable we could also cut £4 billion out of stage 2 of hs2 ?

Building the complete y network for say £24 billion instead of £32 billion is a sizeable reduction and also begs the question of how much further could hs2 extend with another £8 billion - newcastle ? edinburgh ? Also further funds could be spent on mitigation measures and/or we could start building hs2 sooner !

 

[WatcherZero]

Partially related to HS2, HS1 Ltd has just renewed its contract with NR to provide maintenence. Under the previous contract that ran from 2007-2047 NR could vary their price and HS1 ltd was allowed to use other companies if they were cheaper with a break clause in 2015 which had to be activated by the end of March this year. Under the renewed contract NR offers a fixed price (10% cheaper than what they were previously charging) but HS1 ltd cant change provider until at least 2025. ORR will independently set the fixed price NR charges at the beginning of each control period. HS1 Ltd has to pass on 60% of the saving to the Tocs using the line.

 

[bangor-toad]

Hi there,
I've been avoiding the jobs I should be doing and I've come up with two options for the route from HS2 at/near Birminham to Nottingham.

It assumes that the Nottigham station is at the Toton yard which is certainly what all the leaks and hints point towards.

I've come up with two ideas.
The red route is slightly longer but simpler (and cheaper) to build being mainly alongside (but not significantly impinging on) existing tracks.
The blue route is more direct but would require more civil engineering and has the rather ironic honour of passing under the terminal building at East Midlands airport without stopping!

Anyway, this is purely my speculation and I have no priviledged knowledge wahtsoever.
I'll have a go at Nottingham to Sheffield later on and put up a better resolution image...
Enjoy!
Jason

 

[brianthegiant]

Toton bit makes sense to me,
getting HS2 over the river trent and over the MML will be interesting, since both need to be quite high over the river not to impinge on Trent flood flows. As does the M1 for example.
At the same time there will be pressure for any viaduct not to be too high near the Trent Lock area, which is a popular for walking and cycling.

 

[Sunday8pm]

Hi there,
I've been avoiding the jobs I should be doing and I've come up with two options for the route from HS2 at/near Birminham to Nottingham.

It assumes that the Nottigham station is at the Toton yard which is certainly what all the leaks and hints point towards.

I've come up with two ideas.
The red route is slightly longer but simpler (and cheaper) to build being mainly alongside (but not significantly impinging on) existing tracks.
The blue route is more direct but would require more civil engineering and has the rather ironic honour of passing under the terminal building at East Midlands airport without stopping!

Anyway, this is purely my speculation and I have no priviledged knowledge wahtsoever.
I'll have a go at Nottingham to Sheffield later on and put up a better resolution image...
Enjoy!
Jason

I agree with the blue route although it maybe could turn east around Ashby run to the south of the A42 and East Midlands Airport, crossing the M1 between J23 and J23A - turning gently for the north somewhere around Long Whatton/Hathern, and then join up with your blue line east of Kegworth.

 

[nick.c]

Hi there,
I've been avoiding the jobs I should be doing and I've come up with two options for the route from HS2 at/near Birminham to Nottingham.

It assumes that the Nottigham station is at the Toton yard which is certainly what all the leaks and hints point towards.

I've come up with two ideas.
The red route is slightly longer but simpler (and cheaper) to build being mainly alongside (but not significantly impinging on) existing tracks.
The blue route is more direct but would require more civil engineering and has the rather ironic honour of passing under the terminal building at East Midlands airport without stopping!

Anyway, this is purely my speculation and I have no priviledged knowledge wahtsoever.
I'll have a go at Nottingham to Sheffield later on and put up a better resolution image...
Enjoy!
Jason

Interesting! My guess (and it really is a guess) is that the BLUE route is more likely. Partly because it parallels the straightish M42 motorway but also because it minimises the length of 4-track HS2 railway needed from Birmingham Interchange to the junction where the Manchester and Leeds branches diverge. Be very interested in your Nottingham to Sheffield ideas.

 

[TinManDerby]

If Totton Yard is the East Midlands Hub, close to A52 (Derby-Notts Trunk Road), close to M1, not that far from East Midlands Airport, and close to the Midland Mainlines. I was wondering if anyone had any iseas or leaks re possible route north, my idea is the Eriwash Line from Trent Junction to Chesterfield.

 

[nick.c]

If Totton Yard is the East Midlands Hub, close to A52 (Derby-Notts Trunk Road), close to M1, not that far from East Midlands Airport, and close to the Midland Mainlines. I was wondering if anyone had any iseas or leaks re possible route north, my idea is the Eriwash Line from Trent Junction to Chesterfield.

The original 2010 maps for HS2 showed the junction for the Leeds branch just north of the Birmingham delta – adjacent to the M42. This detail was subsequently withdrawn from later maps. Other than that I’m not aware of any other specific details.
The lack of info reflects that those individuals who do know will have signed none disclosure agreements to reduce possible planning blight and also reflects the high level of professionalism of those involved. It also suggests that “those in the know” agree with the proposals and they aren't too controversial – otherwise individuals only marginally involved who have picked up relevant info but who haven’t signed none disclosure agreements might have spilled the beans if they thought that there were overriding issues of public concern.
However during last year’s consultation I spoke to several members of the HS2 Team and did glean some interesting insights. I expressed my view that identifying a viable alignment for the Leeds branch must be more difficult than the Manchester branch because of the topography and also because there are no really obvious transport corridors between Sheffield and Leeds. The response was that it was actually the other way round. The difficult thing for the Leeds branch has been identifying the optimum locations for the two interchange stations in the East Midlands and South Yorkshire. Once that’s done it’s just a matter of “joining the dots” with the shortest viable route. The more difficult route is the Manchester branch because here there are clear choices about whether to go west, east or actually through Stoke-on-Trent. Other forums suggest that an “east of Stoke route” is now preferred though looking at a map no obvious route that avoids a lot of (expensive) tunnelling jumps out at me.
It’ll be fascinating to see the actual proposals when they are eventually published and compare them with our amateur ideas.

 

[Padav]

The more difficult route is the Manchester branch because here there are clear choices about whether to go west, east or actually through Stoke-on-Trent. Other forums suggest that an “east of Stoke route” is now preferred though looking at a map no obvious route that avoids a lot of (expensive) tunnelling jumps out at me.

Indeed, I've been attempting to discern the Western arm's route ever since phase 1 was placed in the public domain. I put together my best guess, based on an mix of various snippets gleaned from a variety of sources and posted it on to another thread here. Like you I'm not in a privileged position. I am strongly supportive of HS2, even though it seems likely that the phase 2 western branch will pass in relatively close proximity to my house (I live in Alderley Edge).

We do know that the Western branch will pass close to Blithfield Reservoir - what is not clear is which side, East or West - if it's to the East (and I believe it will be), a route East of the Stoke on Trent conurbation is near enough certain. This would keep the line well to the East of Cannock Chase - another limiting factor will be the Peak District National Park and higher ground, so we have a good idea which area through which the line must pass?

I believe the line will take a generally North-West trajectory passing under Brown Edge and Mow Cop, skirting along (perhap 500m distant) the South-Eastern edge of Congleton before beginning to turn in a very large arc to a more Northerly direction, descending into cutting before passing under the runways at Manchester Airport from the South-South-West. At this point (of closest proximity to me) the line will be approximately 3000m East of my house.

I am convinced that there will be a Manchester South hub station situtated within the environs of Manchester Airport - this will be a through station, which my best guess shows as subterranean, more or less at right angles to the existing Airport Station (connected from below by escalators). This tunnelled line then continues directly North beneath the heavily built up Wythenshawe housing estates before surfacing closer to the city centre (Baguely area?) possibly following the Princess Parkway alignment into Manchester itself.

Some debate about the site of a Manchester terminus station - could be at Manchester Mayfield although I accept that this would be challenging, but not impossible, given the requirement for 400m long platforms?