HS2 construction updates

[swt_passenger]

Even if there were a shared platform at Euston, it wouldn’t really function as a junction in the sense of allowing a single service to move between HS2 and the conventional WCML, or vice versa, which I think was the earlier question...

 

[Bald Rick]

surprised by that they decided to make HS2 an isolated island there
whats plan if a HS2 train brakes down / OHLE down and need dragging?, would need a loco to travel all the way from Birmingham

Same plan as what happens on HS1.

 

[Bald Rick]

if its entirely segregated from non-high speed line south of Birmingham why are they keeping the curve to enter Euston Northbound?
unless there is grade separation i cant really see a case against a low speed junction at Euston if not for passenger use but for maintenance/measurement trains

The tracks are at different levels. The HS2 tracks are several metres below the WCML tracks and generally stay that way all the way to the portal.

 

[Ianno87]

surprised by that they decided to make HS2 an isolated island there
whats plan if a HS2 train brakes down / OHLE down and need dragging?, would need a loco to travel all the way from Birmingham

I'd have thought HS2 trains would expected to have pretty high reliability (and be able to rescue each other given the frequebcy of service)...and the wires don't come down on HS1 very often.

If a train did fail, you probably dump it in a platform and work around it until it can be rescued and fixed.

The irony of designing in a track connection is (probably) just designing in another point of potential failure.

if its entirely segregated from non-high speed line south of Birmingham why are they keeping the curve to enter Euston Northbound?

Because the platforms need to point north-south to fit into the available space, and the tunnel will be determined by where surface access shafts can by physically located plus the space where the tunnel portal fits.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

if its entirely segregated from non-high speed line south of Birmingham why are they keeping the curve to enter Euston Northbound?
unless there is grade separation i cant really see a case against a low speed junction at Euston if not for passenger use but for maintenance/measurement trains

I would flip the question on it's head and ask, "Why would you change the northbound entry to Euston..?" So doing would entail a new design for the station, new consultations, new safeguarding, and (depending on where the Bill was at the time) additional change to the Bill, extra costs, more land if we changed the orientation of the platforms, etc. etc. Simply deleting the "Hybrid" platform but otherwise retaining the already consulted alignment didn't require any of that.

There is "grade separation" - the HS2 platforms have always been at a lower level that the existing WCML platforms. It wouldn't surprise me if deleting the Hybrid platform contributed to enabling a slightly "lower" alignment into Euston which enabling deleting some pretty substantial civils works in Park Village East and placed that section into mined tunnels also negating the need to reconstruct Mornington, Granby Terrace and Hamstead Road bridges (though the latter two will still need to be extended.)

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

When did the shared platform drop from the plans?

A quick shufty at the old plans I have suggest 2013 give or take a year.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

Of course, the idea of "having a link onto the WCML at Euston/OOC (etc.) in case of perturbation on HS2" is somewhat predicated on the notion that the WCML would have paths available to soak up some diverted HS2 services. As we all know, the WCML is full now and I don't imagine many of us envisage the WCML being any less full once HS2 is operating.

 

[HowardGWR]

It is if you're the sort of person who enjoys the view if it's a succession of tunnels, cuttings and acoustic screens.

Such a person represents about one in 50, from my experience of observing my fellow pax.

 

[Ianno87]

Such a person represents about one in 50, from my experience of observing my fellow pax.

More like 1 in 1000 to the extent of actively making your journey over 50% longer for the sake of seeing the scenic delights of Rugby and Atherstone.

 

[edwin_m]

surprised by that they decided to make HS2 an isolated island there
whats plan if a HS2 train brakes down / OHLE down and need dragging?, would need a loco to travel all the way from Birmingham

They will probably have duplicated systems so as long as there is power in the OLE they can continue, possibly on reduced power. If not, any HS2 train would be able to haul a dead one.

if its entirely segregated from non-high speed line south of Birmingham why are they keeping the curve to enter Euston Northbound?
unless there is grade separation i cant really see a case against a low speed junction at Euston if not for passenger use but for maintenance/measurement trains

What curve?

 

[6Gman]

Such a person represents about one in 50, from my experience of observing my fellow pax.

I didn't suggest anything different. I was simply making the point that individuals will exercise their own choice between options (in response to the poster who announced he would never use HS2).

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

What curve?

Heading North from Euston, after entering the main running tunnel, the route turns left about 100 degrees and heads West towards Old Oak.

 

[edwin_m]

Heading North from Euston, after entering the main running tunnel, the route turns left about 100 degrees and heads West towards Old Oak.

I was thinking you were referring to some kind of connecting curve.

The reason for that curve is so HS2 surfaces parallel to the WCML as both enter Euston. If their platforms weren't parallel then the HS2 station would have to be above or below the existing station or on some other site nearby with much more demolition. The angle between the route before and after the curve may be about 100 degrees but that means it only turns by about 70 degrees.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Heading North from Euston, after entering the main running tunnel, the route turns left about 100 degrees and heads West towards Old Oak.

So does the original WMCL.
They are both close together to Kensal Green/Old Oak.
The GC and Midland routes also have westward sweeps a bit further out, they were all trying to avoid expensive tunnelling under Hampstead Heath.

 

[edwin_m]

HS2 via Old Oak is actually fulfilling Brunel's original idea of running the GWR into Euston rather than building its own station at Paddington.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

I was musing about those people who have declared they will "never use HS2" as a matter of principle.

Apart from thinking "How? HS2 will be the only way to travel between the connected destinations - unless you want to catch a 'stopper' that takes longer and probably has changes." Then the thought occurred, after HS2 opens it might make an interesting "game" or railtour - what's the fastest way to get from Piccadilly to Euston by train, without using an HS2 track or service: I could call it the "Martyrs Railtour." I don't imagine I'll sell many tickets though.

 

[mr_jrt]

Is the loss of the shared platform not just because the reconstruction of Euston has been de-scoped?

Once that eventually happens then presumably the WCML platforms will be on the same, lower level as the HS2 ones, so the connection can be made as part of HS2 phase 2?

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

HS2 via Old Oak is actually fulfilling Brunel's original idea of running the GWR into Euston rather than building its own station at Paddington.

Interesting -I didn't know that. Of course, Paddington itself is similar, albeit to a lesser extent, in that the track take a right turn as the lines enter the station. It wouldn't surprise me to learn it's a common feature for stations in urban areas where the railways "arrived" decades/centuries after the town/city was first laid out.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

Is the loss of the shared platform not just because the reconstruction of Euston has been de-scoped?

Once that eventually happens then presumably the WCML platforms will be on the same, lower level as the HS2 ones, so the connection can be made as part of HS2 phase 2?

Could you expand on what "de-scoping" are you referring to...?

If the WCML platforms at Euston get rebuilt, I wouldn't expect much of an elevation change because the approach into Euston is already on a fairly steep incline. Any significant lowering of the WCML platforms would obviously exacerbate that.

 

[popeter45]

Could you expand on what "de-scoping" are you referring to...?

If the WCML platforms at Euston get rebuilt, I wouldn't expect much of an elevation change because the approach into Euston is already on a fairly steep incline. Any significant lowering of the WCML platforms would obviously exacerbate that.

wasnt it so steep back in the days of steam they needed to pull carriages up via a winch to attach to engines?

 

[Ploughman]

HS2 via Old Oak is actually fulfilling Brunel's original idea of running the GWR into Euston rather than building its own station at Paddington.

And at the Yorkshire end, the route is very close to that laid out for the York and North Midland Railway of around 1839 for George Hudson.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

wasnt it so steep back in the days of steam they needed to pull carriages up via a winch to attach to engines?

I'm not an expert on the history, but I believe that's correct. ISTR they also used "banking" locos at some time in the steam era.

I recall watching a video a couple of years ago of a recent steam hauled rail tour heading up Camden Bank, and it was noticeable just how much longer it was taking the train to depart compared to the modern electric stock.

 

[Dr Hoo]

More like 1 in 1000 to the extent of actively making your journey over 50% longer for the sake of seeing the scenic delights of Rugby and Atherstone.

Especially when it is dark in the winter.

 

[Ianno87]

I was musing about those people who have declared they will "never use HS2" as a matter of principle.

Apart from thinking "How? HS2 will be the only way to travel between the connected destinations - unless you want to catch a 'stopper' that takes longer and probably has changes." Then the thought occurred, after HS2 opens it might make an interesting "game" or railtour - what's the fastest way to get from Piccadilly to Euston by train, without using an HS2 track or service: I could call it the "Martyrs Railtour." I don't imagine I'll sell many tickets though.

I don't get it either:
-Once it is built, it is just a train like any other train...only faster
-"No I won't buy that £10* Advance HS2 single to Manchester, I prefer paying £60* to take twice as long at one third the frequency, thank you very much

*Fares made up

Is the loss of the shared platform not just because the reconstruction of Euston has been de-scoped?

Once that eventually happens then presumably the WCML platforms will be on the same, lower level as the HS2 ones, so the connection can be made as part of HS2 phase 2?

....what exactly is the point...?

 

[Bald Rick]

Is the loss of the shared platform not just because the reconstruction of Euston has been de-scoped?

Once that eventually happens then presumably the WCML platforms will be on the same, lower level as the HS2 ones, so the connection can be made as part of HS2 phase 2?

Euston hasn’t been descoped.

The rebuilding of the ‘classic’ side, as and when it happens, will keep the same levels. Otherwise the disruption would be absolutely horrendous.

wasnt it so steep back in the days of steam they needed to pull carriages up via a winch to attach to engines?

It was the same gradient as it is now. But in 1838, steam locomotives weren’t (quite) powerful enough to get a train up Camden bank. That changed pretty rapidly.

I was musing about those people who have declared they will "never use HS2" as a matter of principle.

Presumably the same people refuse to the Settle and Carlisle, as in the 1870s that was just an expensive vanity project to enable Yorkshire businessmen to get to Cumberland 20 minutes more quickly.

 

[mr_jrt]

The rebuilding of the ‘classic’ side, as and when it happens, will keep the same levels. Otherwise the disruption would be absolutely horrendous.

Given the original proposal was to rebuild Euston in its entirety so you had an integrated station with everything on the same level, then surely the fact the rebuild of the WCML side is a "as and when" unknown is descoping of sorts?

I see the current plans leave the WCML at current levels, but sacrifice platforms 9 & 10 to lengthen others, and of course, platforms 15-19 will go as part of the enlargement of the HS2 side of the station. Means they can't do the over-station developments they had planned to create permeable pedestrian routes across the station, which is a shame.

 

[The Planner]

Given the original proposal was to rebuild Euston in its entirety so you had an integrated station with everything on the same level, then surely the fact the rebuild of the WCML side is a "as and when" unknown is descoping of sorts?

I see the current plans leave the WCML at current levels, but sacrifice platforms 9 & 10 to lengthen others, and of course, platforms 15-19 will go as part of the enlargement of the HS2 side of the station. Means they can't do the over-station developments they had planned to create permeable pedestrian routes across the station, which is a shame.

19 doesnt exist, 17 and 18 have already gone.

 

[Bald Rick]

Given the original proposal was to rebuild Euston in its entirety so you had an integrated station with everything on the same level, then surely the fact the rebuild of the WCML side is a "as and when" unknown is descoping of sorts?

I see the current plans leave the WCML at current levels, but sacrifice platforms 9 & 10 to lengthen others, and of course, platforms 15-19 will go as part of the enlargement of the HS2 side of the station. Means they can't do the over-station developments they had planned to create permeable pedestrian routes across the station, which is a shame.

The ‘original proposal’ didn’t have everything at the same level. Perhaps in an architects impression, but not in engineering reality

 

[NotATrainspott]

Pretty much the only reason you'd do a major rebuild of the WCML side is to put it a few metres lower down so that the HS2 concourse level can extend flat across it and then be at the right level for Eversholt Street. The platforms might not need to be as low because of the smaller loading gauge, but it would still be a good few metres lower than today. With the concourse level flat across the entire station, you have the best possible station experience and the best possible opportunities to develop the station and surrounding area.

 

[Bald Rick]

Pretty much the only reason you'd do a major rebuild of the WCML side is to put it a few metres lower down so that the HS2 concourse level can extend flat across it and then be at the right level for Eversholt Street. The platforms might not need to be as low because of the smaller loading gauge, but it would still be a good few metres lower than today. With the concourse level flat across the entire station, you have the best possible station experience and the best possible opportunities to develop the station and surrounding area.

It wouldn’t make any difference to development opportunities there, which are all very much limited by protected sight lines.

And, as stated previously, digging down several metres is ok on a brownfield site - but it’s altogether different when you are trying to run trains.