How would you improve local rail after the introduction of HS2 (&NPR)?

[The Ham]

Given that HS2 is going to be building be stations at Birmingham, Leeds, Manchester, Crewe, etc. there's an argument that this will, by removing long distance services from the existing platforms, provide space for more services to run to these stations.

As such, and also bearing in mind that the long distance services are also being removed from the classic network, how would you use this freed up capacity to improve rail services?

It should also be noted that, because some of the big ticket costs have already been done in the firm of improved capacity at the major station, the overall costs of schemes which would require additional improvements would fall. This would mean that the cost to benefit ratio would likely be better and in some cases a lot better.

In answering this question there will be some that will need to stop thinking HS2 is of no use to me (as I don't want to go to London) and start thinking how can I use HS2 to improve the rest of the rail network for me (as I do want to travel into those cities from the area around them).

Edit: title changed to include for discussing improvements after the opening of NPR, although with NPR in brackets to indicate its less confirmed status.

 

[Bucephalus]

London-watford-MK could get very frequent.

Maybe a fast frequent Sheffield-Rotherham-wakey-leeds would be a hit.

Room for a Manchester-Stockport tram-train?

 

[tbtc]

As an example, once the "eastern" leg is built, the path used for the half hourly Kings Cross - Leeds service could be used between Peterborough and Doncaster for an hourly Kings Cross - Cleethorpes service and an hourly Stansted - Cambridge - Leeds service.

I'd expect the southern end of the WCML to end up like the BML, with a "turn up and go" frequency at key stations south of Rugby - as well as more services stopping at Trent Valley stations, since there's no requirement to get out of the way for a 125mph service every few minutes. Look at how frequent you can run services south of the Thames, where everything is 100mph rather than the gaps between 100/110/125mph services north of the Thames.

It also gives scope for paths to be used on "non London" services like West Midlands - MK - Watford - Shepherd's Bush - Clapham Junction - Croydon - Gatwick - Brighton (since not everything will be about getting into Euston as fast as possible).

Or paths to be used on Manchester/ Liverpool - Bletchley - Oxford - Thames Valley services.

Take (some/most of) the fastest trains off the existing main lines and there's a lot more space for other services, when everything is running at the same top speed.

 

[318266]

Birmingham New Streat - Smethwick - Stoubridge - Worcester - Hereford

 

[Bletchleyite]

It also gives scope for paths to be used on "non London" services like West Midlands - MK - Watford - Shepherd's Bush - Clapham Junction - Croydon - Gatwick - Brighton (since not everything will be about getting into Euston as fast as possible).

I'd like to see an IC via the WLL reinstated, but I'd suggest it should not stop (well, not release the doors) between Watford Jn and Clapham Jn so to avoid it being overrun by short distance passengers.

I'd go, say, <somewhere>-Birmingham New St-Birmingham Intl-Coventry-Rugby-MKC-Watford Jn-Clapham Jn-East Croydon-Gatwick Airport-Brighton once an hour.

Liverpool Lime St might be a good candidate for <somewhere>, in which case it'd be Lime St, Runcorn, Crewe, Stafford, Wolves. Rolling stock could be pairs of 110mph Class 350/1s (as they are dual voltage) with 2+2 in Standard and 2+1 in First, and a trolley service.

 

[DavidGrain]

Twice in the last few months I have travelled Birmingham-London-Gatwick Airport so I am sure there is scope from reinstating that service via the WCML and Kensington Olympia.

 

[jfisher21]

Euston - first stop Harrow and Wealdstone - cross to DC lines - all stations to Watford Junction. Every 30 mins. Current service to those stations is painfully slow!

Maybe Euston - Northampton non stop once an hour too.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

I'd like to see an IC via the WLL reinstated, but I'd suggest it should not stop (well, not release the doors) between Watford Jn and Clapham Jn so to avoid it being overrun by short distance passengers.

I'd go, say, <somewhere>-Birmingham New St-Birmingham Intl-Coventry-Rugby-MKC-Watford Jn-Clapham Jn-East Croydon-Gatwick Airport-Brighton once an hour.

Liverpool Lime St might be a good candidate for <somewhere>, in which case it'd be Lime St, Runcorn, Crewe, Stafford, Wolves. Rolling stock could be pairs of 110mph Class 350/1s (as they are dual voltage) with 2+2 in Standard and 2+1 in First, and a trolley service.

I can't say that's a bad idea; you'd just have to appropriately mitigate risk of punctuality issues. Then again, it is possible to run the service. The 350/1s or perhaps some shoegear 379s would be lovely for that and would indeed work better as through services from Liverpool (etc) to Birmingham and down to Watford and off towards Brighton. Half-hourly might be a bit much, but hourly could work; and indeed if it was more like 1tph Brighton - Liverpool and 1tph Brighton - Milton Keynes + 1tph International - Liverpool then it could be a winning formula. Perhaps better still would be for CrossCountry to get these 379s and use them as "Crowd Buster" Manchester services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Looking further north, a proper S-Bahn type service could be instituted in south Manchester - perhaps 4tph all stations to Hazel Grove using suitable EMUs, with the Buxtons running fast (Stockport and Hazel Grove only) in between (leave Picc a minute or two before the stopper).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Euston - first stop Harrow and Wealdstone - cross to DC lines - all stations to Watford Junction. Every 30 mins. Current service to those stations is painfully slow!

I don't think I could see that happening because the conflicts caused by crossing to the DC lines would massively reduce capacity. Especially because the long-distance lines are between the DC and the outer-suburban lines that you'd probably want something stopping at Harrow and Wealdstone to use.

What I could see happening is that many more of the current LNR services would stop at Harrow and Wealdstone, so that changing to a fast train at Harrow and Wealdstone becomes much more attractive for journeys between London and Headstone Lane, Hatch End, etc.

Maybe Euston - Northampton non stop once an hour too.

Again I'm a bit dubious about this because it will remove capacity, given that the trend on the WCML will be for most trains to be stopping more often (Besides, is there enough demand to justify a train that carries no passengers at all for intermediate stations?). Wouldn't such a train have to cross over on the flat from the 'Virgin' lines to the 'LNR' lines somewhere North of Milton Keynes? I wonder if Northampton could end up a winner in terms of frequency (more LNR trains calling there) but a loser in terms of journey times to London, with LNR trains generally calling at more stops, so fast journeys to London would generally require a change at Milton Keynes (where you would now have a turn-up-and-go service from Virgin trains)?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wouldn't such a train have to cross over on the flat from the 'Virgin' lines to the 'LNR' lines somewhere North of Milton Keynes?

Platform 5 at MKC was set up for this exact purpose (fast->slow).

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Platform 5 at MKC was set up for this exact purpose (fast->slow).

Thanks! But I'm now confused. Looking at the Open Train Times map, it looks like platform 5 sits between the up and down fast lines. How does that help get trains in both directions between fast and slow? And won't you still have the problem of conflicting moves on very busy lines (fast lines post HS2 still presumably very busy, slow perhaps less busy if some trains from London terminate at or before Milton Keynes).

 

[jyte]

Thanks! But I'm now confused. Looking at the Open Train Times map, it looks like platform 5 sits between the up and down fast lines. How does that help get trains in both directions between fast and slow? And won't you still have the problem of conflicting moves on very busy lines (fast lines post HS2 still presumably very busy, slow perhaps less busy if some trains from London terminate at or before Milton Keynes).

Northbound slow train pulls into platform 5 and stops leaving Northbound platform 6 clear for fast non-stop trains. Southbound fast train passes platform 4 about the same time, then slow northbound train departs platform 5 gunning it across a pair of either 50 or 60mph crossovers to the slow lines before the next southbound fast train sails through. Provided the Northbound slow and southbound fast services are both on time, it's a pretty efficient operation.

 

[swt_passenger]

Twice in the last few months I have travelled Birmingham-London-Gatwick Airport so I am sure there is scope from reinstating that service via the WCML and Kensington Olympia.

There really isn't scope, because they want to keep the WLL services on the slows south of Clapham Junction and avoid crossing over to the fasts. That makes them uncompetitive for time.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'd like to see an IC via the WLL reinstated, but I'd suggest it should not stop (well, not release the doors) between Watford Jn and Clapham Jn so to avoid it being overrun by short distance passengers.

I'd go, say, <somewhere>-Birmingham New St-Birmingham Intl-Coventry-Rugby-MKC-Watford Jn-Clapham Jn-East Croydon-Gatwick Airport-Brighton once an hour...

There's nothing HS2 is offering that will magic up capacity for such a fast train south of Clapham Junction and you well know it.

 

[AndrewE]

There's nothing HS2 is offering that will magic up capacity for such a fast train south of Clapham Junction and you well know it.

It might have done so if HS2 had run through to Brighton or somewhere else useful in the south. Oh for a bit of joined-up thinking! (or even a long term strategy - but that's suspiciously close to a Transport Policy: Absolutely Verboten!)

 

[DavidGrain]

It might have done so if HS2 had run through to Brighton or somewhere else useful in the south. Oh for a bit of joined-up thinking! (or even a long term strategy - but that's suspiciously close to a Transport Policy: Absolutely Verboten!)

High Speed to Brighton? Save you about 15 minutes off your commute to London, then when you get to London you might find that you are not in the right place so your travel in London might take you an extra 15 minutes.

 

[AndrewE]

High Speed to Brighton? Save you about 15 minutes off your commute to London, then when you get to London you might find that you are not in the right place so your travel in London might take you an extra 15 minutes.

Sigh! It's not about London commuting. I suggested Brighton as one potential Inter-City destination for HS2 beyond London. Ashford would have done just as well. It saves the space needed for terminal platforms in London and saves one group of long-distance travellers the need to change in London. Could also feed a bigger area with another outer suburban station.
Even if it took the same time as now it would save having to change station (loading the underground) and provide more capacity.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

Northbound slow train pulls into platform 5 and stops leaving Northbound platform 6 clear for fast non-stop trains. Southbound fast train passes platform 4 about the same time, then slow northbound train departs platform 5 gunning it across a pair of either 50 or 60mph crossovers to the slow lines before the next southbound fast train sails through. Provided the Northbound slow and southbound fast services are both on time, it's a pretty efficient operation.

As used to happen with the XX46 Crewe services (when they were 100mph via Northampton) or now I believe with the XX49 Birmingham. On the Southbound, I think some trains LNWR operate are Up Slow - Up Fast at Hanslope but when the Crewe - London trains ran via Northampton they used to be Up Slow - Up Fast at Ledburn. Inevitably you were always 2-3 late as a Virgin was almost always a touch behind.

 

[jyte]

As used to happen with the XX46 Crewe services (when they were 100mph via Northampton) or now I believe with the XX49 Birmingham. On the Southbound, I think some trains LNWR operate are Up Slow - Up Fast at Hanslope but when the Crewe - London trains ran via Northampton they used to be Up Slow - Up Fast at Ledburn. Inevitably you were always 2-3 late as a Virgin was almost always a touch behind.

True, but at least with the 'new' platform arrangement, if the Southbound fast service is late and the LNWR service is held, the Northbound line remains free.

 

[4-SUB 4732]

True, but at least with the 'new' platform arrangement, if the Southbound fast service is late and the LNWR service is held, the Northbound line remains free.

Oh aye, indeed. And the trains used to sit at Northampton for a good 5-10 minutes so even a 4 minute delay was no major problem.

The issue was always the southbound as you'd be held at Ledburn and then also be stopping at Watford; so any on time 390s behind you were now in the tunnel waiting for you to clear. The Virgin wouldn't fail PPM as it was a minor 2 minute inconvenience but, you know...

 

[Chester1]

Looking further north, a proper S-Bahn type service could be instituted in south Manchester - perhaps 4tph all stations to Hazel Grove using suitable EMUs, with the Buxtons running fast (Stockport and Hazel Grove only) in between (leave Picc a minute or two before the stopper).

Not just Hazel Grove though! Crewe and Stoke too. Liverpool, Wigan and Preston being the other ends. Buxton and Mid Cheshire line subject to wiring. There are a range of possible services when the current 5tph of VT and XC services can be replaced (I would keep Manchester-Birmingham-Bristol-South West though). Thinking about 2027 and the planned opening of HS2 to Crewe, there are still oppertunities. As a resident of Stockport I don't like to say it, but Crewe-Stockport-Manchester does not need 5tph HS2 services + stoppers. A big upgrade / rebuild of the Styal and Airport lines could allow the diversion of 2 out of 3 London services and 1 Birmingham. That would free up capacity for more commuter services via Stockport.

I like this thread because it highlights the benefits of HS2 and not just for London. Without HS2 any improvements to services in the south of Manchester are basically longer trains and electrification because the scope for increasing frequency on the exisiting infrastructure is very small. The plans being drawn up to intergrate the WCML spur and Airport-Piccadilly tunnel into NPR would provide the same oppertunities for Liverpool-Manchester local services too.

 

[The Planner]

Euston - first stop Harrow and Wealdstone - cross to DC lines - all stations to Watford Junction. Every 30 mins. Current service to those stations is painfully slow!

Maybe Euston - Northampton non stop once an hour too.

Where are you joining the DC lines?

Again I'm a bit dubious about this because it will remove capacity, given that the trend on the WCML will be for most trains to be stopping more often (Besides, is there enough demand to justify a train that carries no passengers at all for intermediate stations?). Wouldn't such a train have to cross over on the flat from the 'Virgin' lines to the 'LNR' lines somewhere North of Milton Keynes? I wonder if Northampton could end up a winner in terms of frequency (more LNR trains calling there) but a loser in terms of journey times to London, with LNR trains generally calling at more stops, so fast journeys to London would generally require a change at Milton Keynes (where you would now have a turn-up-and-go service from Virgin trains)?

Platform 5 at MKC was set up for this exact purpose (fast->slow).

It wasn't, it was a nice side effect, it was for overtaking moves. Hanslope is technically faster to swap over. Northampton will get some peak non-stoppers I would expect.

 

[infobleep]

How about adding back some stations between Oxenholm and Penrith. Which ever are most useful to me put back. I'm not suggesting all. Also any in Scotland that would be useful on the West Coast line?

 

[Bletchleyite]

How about adding back some stations between Oxenholm and Penrith. Which ever are most useful to out back. I'm not suggesting all. Also any in Scotland that would be useful on the West Coast line?

To serve what, exactly? One for each sheep?

There's a slight argument for reinstating Barton and Broughton, and another one around Lancashire way, but there is really nothing at all between those two.

 

[gordonthemoron]

I would expect 1tph or more stopping Coventry-Rugby-MK-Watford-Euston in addtion to the existing Glasgow/Edinburgh-Birmingham-Coventry-MK-Euston service, as Coventry is a major loser from HS2

 

[B&I]

Not just Hazel Grove though! Crewe and Stoke too. Liverpool, Wigan and Preston being the other ends. Buxton and Mid Cheshire line subject to wiring. There are a range of possible services when the current 5tph of VT and XC services can be replaced (I would keep Manchester-Birmingham-Bristol-South West though). Thinking about 2027 and the planned opening of HS2 to Crewe, there are still oppertunities. As a resident of Stockport I don't like to say it, but Crewe-Stockport-Manchester does not need 5tph HS2 services + stoppers. A big upgrade / rebuild of the Styal and Airport lines could allow the diversion of 2 out of 3 London services and 1 Birmingham. That would free up capacity for more commuter services via Stockport.

I like this thread because it highlights the benefits of HS2 and not just for London. Without HS2 any improvements to services in the south of Manchester are basically longer trains and electrification because the scope for increasing frequency on the exisiting infrastructure is very small. The plans being drawn up to intergrate the WCML spur and Airport-Piccadilly tunnel into NPR would provide the same oppertunities for Liverpool-Manchester local services too.

Perhaps, if 'NPR' ever gets built, and absorbs the city centre-city centre flows and does something about capacity (particularly around central Manchester and Leeds), and some other infrastructure projects go ahead eg Edge Hill Spur in Liverpool, platforms 15 and 16 at Piccadilly, we could divide as much as possible of the Northern network into a series of S bahn-type networks centred on the major cities, with distinct branding and easy to understand service patterns.

Merseyrail is the obvious model, expanding to cover everything west of the WCML, north of Crewe and south of Preston. A similar operation centred on Manchester would cover from the WCML to the Pennines. There would be inevitable overlap at certain points eg Helsby-Chester, Preston-Blackpool, but nothing unmanageable, and encouraging distinct services from each city might open up new routes eg Manchester-St Helens (if the Junction-Central line was ever revived), Liverpool-Wigan-Bolton.

Other networks could be centred on Leeds / Bradford (twin hubs would seem natural there), Sheffield and Newcastle (the heavy rail lines left over by the Metro). The model could also be scaled to fit other areas eg around Preston, and usefully replicated in other parts of the country eg the West Midlands, Derby-Nottingham-Leicester, Bristol, the Solent.

 

[Chester1]

Perhaps, if 'NPR' ever gets built, and absorbs the city centre-city centre flows and does something about capacity (particularly around central Manchester and Leeds), and some other infrastructure projects go ahead eg Edge Hill Spur in Liverpool, platforms 15 and 16 at Piccadilly, we could divide as much as possible of the Northern network into a series of S bahn-type networks centred on the major cities, with distinct branding and easy to understand service patterns.

Merseyrail is the obvious model, expanding to cover everything west of the WCML, north of Crewe and south of Preston. A similar operation centred on Manchester would cover from the WCML to the Pennines. There would be inevitable overlap at certain points eg Helsby-Chester, Preston-Blackpool, but nothing unmanageable, and encouraging distinct services from each city might open up new routes eg Manchester-St Helens (if the Junction-Central line was ever revived), Liverpool-Wigan-Bolton.

Other networks could be centred on Leeds / Bradford (twin hubs would seem natural there), Sheffield and Newcastle (the heavy rail lines left over by the Metro). The model could also be scaled to fit other areas eg around Preston, and usefully replicated in other parts of the country eg the West Midlands, Derby-Nottingham-Leicester, Bristol, the Solent.

I think thats the direction of change and something like that but on a smaller scale will probably be introduced after HS2. Most of the infrastructure is already in place but is being used by intercity services. The HS2 phase 2a bill is going through parliament with few objections but won't become law for at least a year because parliaments time is being absorded by brexit legislation. The phase 2b bill won't be introduced until 2020 now, partly because of the lack of parliamentry time and partly to alter the plans to provide provision for junctions with NPR and to decide what do do at Piccadilly. I am hopeful that a western branch of NPR will be built, using part of HS2. A link from the HS2 Wigan spur to Liverpool South Parkway could be used by 8tph - 2tph Liverpool-London, 2tph Liverpool-Birmingham and 4tph Liverpool-Manchester. I am less hopeful of Manchester to Leeds and the ECML being built.

 

[B&I]

I think thats the direction of change and something like that but on a smaller scale will probably be introduced after HS2. Most of the infrastructure is already in place but is being used by intercity services. The HS2 phase 2a bill is going through parliament with few objections but won't become law for at least a year because parliaments time is being absorded by brexit legislation. The phase 2b bill won't be introduced until 2020 now, partly because of the lack of parliamentry time and partly to alter the plans to provide provision for junctions with NPR and to decide what do do at Piccadilly. I am hopeful that a western branch of NPR will be built, using part of HS2. A link from the HS2 Wigan spur to Liverpool South Parkway could be used by 8tph - 2tph Liverpool-London, 2tph Liverpool-Birmingham and 4tph Liverpool-Manchester. I am less hopeful of Manchester to Leeds and the ECML being built.

Stopping the high speed line at South Parkway (itself not the easiest location to reach) would probably just move the logjam to the Edge Hill end of the WCML. I'd suggest a high speed tunnel to there, then take the local services underground via the old freight tunnels, clearing Lime Street high level for high speed and other long distance trains.

Leaving the transpennine lines as they are would be idiotic, though that's no gurantee it wouldn't happen. The Standedge route is full already, and Hope Valley is close to it

 

[DynamicSpirit]

There's a slight argument for reinstating Barton and Broughton, and another one around Lancashire way, but there is really nothing at all between those two.

I would say there's a strong argument for quite a few new stations between Warrington and Oxenholme, which would be served by new commuter trains running along that route. (There's certainly little case for slowing down the existing and already very busy services by adding more stops). The WCML along that stretch passes through loads of populated areas without stopping. The trouble is, you'd probably need to 4-track the route to be able to fit the new services in, even around the existing fast trains. And I would imagine that HS2 is likely to feed more fast trains on to the WCML there, so building more stations without 4-tracking would become even less viable. But if money could be found to do it, I could see 4-tracking and building a slew of new stations along that line being very useful not just for local commuters but also to provide connections to the HS2 classic-compatibles at Preston and Wigan.