HS2 frequency to remain at 18 trains per hour confirms minister

[Jorge Da Silva]

I make it 4 Avanti services per hour but i have suggested some changes?

• 1 to Manchester Piccadilly via Stoke
• 1 to Wolverhampton (could this go to Shrewsbury)
• 1 to Preston via Birmingham (could this go to Blackpool or Windermere maybe alternate)
• 1 to Holyhead

17 LNWR services per hour (

• 5 to Tring,
• 1 to Watford,
• 2 to Bletchley, (could this not just go to MKC?)
• 1 to MKC,
• 1 to Northampton,
• 1 to Crewe via Nuneaton (could this not go to Liverpool as well?)
• 1 to Lichfield TV via Nuneaton (could this go to Crewe providing two semi-fasts to Crewe)
• 3 to Birmingham (Could some of these be extended to serve other places?)
• 1 to Liverpool via Birmingham

2 Southern services (1 to Watford 1 to MKC),
4 Overground as at Present then obviously 10tph via HS2.

I have read on one document by the DfT about Rochdale via Manchester Victoria and Barrow-in-Furness

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Here were the suggestions in the report https://assets.publishing.service.g...s2-released-capacity-study-summary-report.pdf page 13

 

[miami]

How about looking at the GWR operation (or Eurostar), and considering a direct classic-line London to Windermere service on a Friday evening and a return on Sunday, and perhaps every day in school holiday time? There'll hopefully be room for stuff like that post HS2.

On the classics? How long a platform is there at Windermere?

Rochdale via Manchester Victoria and Barrow-in-Furness

That's a rather circuitous route!

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

On the classics? How long a platform is there at Windermere?



That's a rather circuitous route!

Thats what i thought. Windermere on second thoughts could be changed to a few trains per day and hourly service runs to Blackpool only with the occasional train running to Windermere. Chester could gain an extra hourly service looks like it could you do this with the Wolverhampton service and run it to Chester via Wrexham and Shrewsbury?

 

[cle]

There were always going to be two big losers with HS2, because serving them is decidedly awkward and they on their own don't justify their present level of service, but get it because it's operationally convenient at present. Coventry is the other one.

There are plenty of examples of this on the network, though - minor stations on Merseyrail are a good example, e.g. Aughton Park, Town Green, Capenhurst, Bache, Little Sutton and Overpool, none of which really justify more than an hourly DMU but might as well have the full service or near to it because it's easier.

Yep. The difference is that for a few years, Stockport will have services to OOC and even some years to Euston on HS2 - but then they will shift.

I'm curious though as to the traditional WCML Manchester frequency in those same overlapping years ie 2029-31 and from 2031-35 - will Stockport see 6tph to Euston (3tph OOC, 3tph WCML) or 4tph (3tpth OOC, 1tph WCML) - and if the latter, what is going to take up those spare paths from Manchester through Stockport?

 

[Ianno87]

The PM peak, specifically on a Friday, being when it'd most be needed!

How about looking at the GWR operation (or Eurostar), and considering a direct classic-line London to Windermere service on a Friday evening and a return on Sunday, and perhaps every day in school holiday time? There'll hopefully be room for stuff like that post HS2.

Remember that the "evening" peak on the Scotland via Brum service ends with the 1743 departure. The 1843 onwards terminate at Preston or sooner. As the 1843 counts as "peak", you can't model it and count its benefits in the business case if doesn't run for the full duration of the peak.

And modelling isn't granular enough to pick up the specifics of Friday demand on indivual trains in a reliable way.

Remember the above is all just assumptions for a business case, not the minutae of provision of individual services. Whether or not a service goes to Windermere will just change the BCR for HS2 from 1.52189 to 1.52198 or something. It's irrelevant trying to specify such a level of detail at this stage.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Yep. The difference is that for a few years, Stockport will have services to OOC and even some years to Euston on HS2 - but then they will shift.

I'm curious though as to the traditional WCML Manchester frequency in those same overlapping years ie 2029-31 and from 2031-35 - will Stockport see 6tph to Euston (3tph OOC, 3tph WCML) or 4tph (3tpth OOC, 1tph WCML) - and if the latter, what is going to take up those spare paths from Manchester through Stockport?

between 2031 and 2035 it will be 1 via WCML and then 3 via HS2 so the latter. From 2035 HS2 Phase 2b is due to open and services will move to run via Manchester Airport so it is possible some services may run via Stockport may be 2tph.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Remember that the "evening" peak on the Scotland via Brum service ends with the 1743 departure. The 1843 onwards terminate at Preston or sooner. As the 1843 counts as "peak", you can't model it and count its benefits in the business case if doesn't run for the full duration of the peak.

And modelling isn't granular enough to pick up the specifics of Friday demand on indivual trains in a reliable way.

Remember the above is all just assumptions for a business case, not the minutae of provision of individual services. Whether or not a service goes to Windermere will just change the BCR for HS2 from 1.52189 to 1.52198 or something. It's irrelevant trying to specify such a level of detail at this stage.

so basically it seems like they assume the Glasgow/Edinburgh to London via Birmingham service will be kept? That clarifies things. Any final service pattern will be decided by Avanti and the DfT at a later date.

 

[Ianno87]

Any final service pattern will be decided by Avanti and the DfT at a later date.

Precisely. Both because demand pattens will continue to grow and evolve in the meantime, and no doubt Avanti will spot commercial opportunities over and above the specification as well.

The London-Brum-Scotland service being a perfect example of a service that itself exists because of Virgin spotting a commercial opportunity (new through services whilst saving rolling stock) that was nowhere to be seen in the detail of franchise specification - it went over and above it.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Precisely. Both because demand pattens will continue to grow and evolve in the meantime, and no doubt Avanti will spot commercial opportunities over and above the specification as well.

The London-Brum-Scotland service being a perfect example of a service that itself exists because of Virgin spotting a commercial opportunity (new through services whilst saving rolling stock) that was nowhere to be seen in the detail of franchise specification - it went over and above it.

exactly I suspect though more destinations could be served post HS2.

 

[Ianno87]

exactly I suspect though more destinations could be served post HS2.

Entirely possible.

But what you *don't* want to do at this stage is hang business cases on new exciting destinations, in case you later change your mind if they are not the right thing to do (e.g. they are operationally difficult) and leave yourself open to challenge or get stuck with them.

Keep the core service simple at this stage, and something you know you can achieve and demontrates a business case. Then add all the opportunities on closer to 'the day of the race' once you more have confidence they can be done.

 

[Bald Rick]

Any final service pattern will be decided by the DfT at a later date

Corrected that for you!

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Corrected that for you!

I suspect the dft will have a heavy influence over where services go.

 

[Bald Rick]

I suspect the dft will have a heavy influence over where services go.

The Secretarof State will decide where they go.

 

[London Trains]

There were always going to be two big losers with HS2, because serving them is decidedly awkward and they on their own don't justify their present level of service, but get it because it's operationally convenient at present. Coventry is the other one.

There are a lot more losers with HS2:

Coventry
Stafford
Stoke
Wilmslow?
Stockport
Chester (the sole reason they werent even thought about for HS2 is because of the lack of OHLE. Also their services will have stops added)
North Wales (ditto)
Oxenholme (HS2 is planned to skip it)
Penrith (ditto)
Doncaster
Wakefield

and probably others I forgot...

 

[Ianno87]

There are a lot more losers with HS2:

Coventry
Stafford
Stoke
Wilmslow?
Stockport
Chester (the sole reason they werent even thought about for HS2 is because of the lack of OHLE. Also their services will have stops added)
North Wales (ditto)
Oxenholme (HS2 is planned to skip it)
Penrith (ditto)
Doncaster
Wakefield

and probably others I forgot...

1) Take Stoke and Stafford off the list, they are served by HS2 trains to Macclesfield

2) Oxenholme and Penrith are served by HS2 Birmingham trains.

3) Those places will benefit in that remaining London-bound services won't already be full of punters from further north when they arrive.

 

[stuu]

Which leads to the questions:

Will HS2 be the first highspeed railway in the world to have a 6 track high speed formation away from a station?

Will HS2 be the first highspeed railway in the world where it will be possible to have 4 services operating concurrently at high speed on the same stretch of formation?

No, that segment is 6 tracks for a few kilometres. I expect there are others in China as well. The LAV south from Madrid is being quadrupled for ~20kms at the moment which is the only segment in Europe that I'm aware of

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

There are a lot more losers with HS2:

Coventry
Stafford
Stoke
Wilmslow?
Stockport
Chester (the sole reason they werent even thought about for HS2 is because of the lack of OHLE. Also their services will have stops added)
North Wales (ditto)
Oxenholme (HS2 is planned to skip it)
Penrith (ditto)
Doncaster
Wakefield

and probably others I forgot...

1. Gains extra Birmingham service as four LNWR services are proposed plus 2 Avanti services so benedits plus an extra CrossCountry service
2. Stafford served by HS2 and WCML so no
3. Same as Stafford
4. Services Likely to still be served by WCML. Initially served by HS2 once an hour replaced by WCML later on.
5. Served By CrossCountry services still and WCML services to London potentially 2 times an hour (one via HS2 the other via WCML)
6. Potential for extra service according to the DfT with increased services to half-hourly
7. Hourly services to Holyhead are in the business case
8. Served by WCML via Birmingham as at present according to the business case and still served by HS2 Birmingham services
9. Same as Oxenholme
10. Extra stops potential for extra direct links
11. Extra services post HS2 with freed up capacity or keeping of existing service.

You forget HS2 fees up capacity for additional services and so places like Coventry gain extra services like CrossCountry services can stop on the Newcastle to Reading service and 4 LNWR services instead of 3 and 2 Avanti services potentially (up from 1)

 

[Bald Rick]

No, that segment is 6 tracks for a few kilometres. I expect there are others in China as well. The LAV south from Madrid is being quadrupled for ~20kms at the moment which is the only segment in Europe that I'm aware of

If you read off the map I linked off earlier, the 6 track section is for less than 2km.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On the classics? How long a platform is there at Windermere?

It's fairly long, and if I recall rightly quite easy to extend as there is nothing in the way at the Oxenholme end. I don't know precisely how long, but we also don't know what rolling stock will operate these services. A 5-car 80x would definitely fit, for instance, and they will have some of those.

 

[Bletchleyite]

2) Oxenholme and Penrith are served by HS2 Birmingham trains.

Penrith is a bit moot, it's another one of those places that gets a decent service purely out of operational convenience. But not giving England's biggest tourist destination (though by train it's probably the second-biggest after the Westcountry) a direct service to London (a wandering slow one via Brum doesn't count) is nuts, in my view purely being done to placate Wee Jimmy Krankie with some faster trains.

To me, all trains should call at all mainline stations between Crewe and Carlisle (i.e. WBQ, Wigan NW, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith).

I also think all "Avanti" services should call at Watford, MK and Rugby, and that doing that is more important than having silly frequencies on the LNR route (which has also been done with inconvenient and inconsistent skip stopping, e.g. no service stopping at both Leighton and Cheddington). I had hoped we would gain a "cleaner" pattern, but, oh no, the approach of "let's see what we can ram in" has been chosen as usual.

Regarding the Bletchley terminators I expect those don't go to MKC because there might be too many trains crammed into the bay P1 for operation to be reliable. There will also be more demand at Bletchley than there is now due to EWR.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thats what i thought. Windermere on second thoughts could be changed to a few trains per day and hourly service runs to Blackpool only with the occasional train running to Windermere. Chester could gain an extra hourly service looks like it could you do this with the Wolverhampton service and run it to Chester via Wrexham and Shrewsbury?

Regarding Holyhead they could give that an hourly service now just by ordering slightly more 80x.

Windermere is a tourist destination, so would probably only need to be a couple of trains per day in summer and just Friday out Sunday back in winter.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Regarding Holyhead they could give that an hourly service now just by ordering slightly more 80x.

Windermere is a tourist destination, so would probably only need to be a couple of trains per day in summer and just Friday out Sunday back in winter.

that could work. Blackpool could get a full hourly service and maybe a half-hourly service to Chester As well as an hourly service to Shrewsbury

 

[Ianno87]

Penrith is a bit moot, it's another one of those places that gets a decent service purely out of operational convenience. But not giving England's biggest tourist destination (though by train it's probably the second-biggest after the Westcountry) a direct service to London (a wandering slow one via Brum doesn't count) is nuts, in my view purely being done to placate Wee Jimmy Krankie with some faster trains.

It's actually more of a problem to do with stopping 400 metre trains at Oxenholme. Down trains would foul up the south end junction.

Problem is as well that the tourist demand will be centred on particular trains at particular times of day and particular times of year - it's not a consistent "all day" demand. The size of the air market prize between London and Scotland may be greater, and more justification for kerping journey times down.

But *if* Windermere branch services remained extended to Lancaster or Preston, even in some hours only, that still only means a single change to reach Windermere from Euston via HS2, without having to stop at Oxenholme (which becomes a somewhat redundant stop)

To me, all trains should call at all mainline stations between Crewe and Carlisle (i.e. WBQ, Wigan NW, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith).

See points above. Plus:
-Warrington can't be served by Euston-Scotland trains in Phase 2b as HS2 bypasses it
-2 or 3 HS2 trains an hour is just overkill for most stations except Preston and Carlisle

I also think all "Avanti" services should call at Watford, MK and Rugby, and that doing that is more important than having silly frequencies on the LNR route (which has also been done with inconvenient and inconsistent skip stopping, e.g. no service stopping at both Leighton and Cheddington). I had hoped we would gain a "cleaner" pattern, but, oh no, the approach of "let's see what we can ram in" has been chosen as usual.

When modelling a business case, the "unclean" pattern is difficult to unpick. The skip stopping may be complicated but it offer some fast journey times point to point. Standardising stopping patterns invariably has the consequences of slowing some journeys down slightly (with the only benefit being boosting frequency at quieter stations). A small slowing down on a significant flow can the suddenly hack ££££ off your business case when you run it through the demand model.

Like I say, all the patterns do at this stage is prove a business case - the actual operator may indeed do something different and more operationally logical.

 

[stuu]

If you read off the map I linked off earlier, the 6 track section is for less than 2km.

I put a link to a location in Guangzhou with 6 tracks, that's what I was referring to

 

[CW2]

To me, all trains should call at all mainline stations between Crewe and Carlisle (i.e. WBQ, Wigan NW, Preston, Lancaster, Oxenholme, Penrith).
I also think all "Avanti" services should call at Watford, MK and Rugby,...<snip>

Making all trains stop everywhere is lazy and inefficient. There is a direct link between faster journey times and increased patronage = increased revenue. Compared to passing through non-stop, a call at Lancaster, Oxenholme, or Penrith will add about 5 minutes each, so a total of 15 minutes compared wth a non-stop Preston - Carlisle run. When you consider the amount of money spent on infrastructure improvements to gain a few seconds, throwing away minutes on unnecessary stops is utter madness.

 

[Ianno87]

Making all trains stop everywhere is lazy and inefficient. There is a direct link between faster journey times and increased patronage = increased revenue. Compared to passing through non-stop, a call at Lancaster, Oxenholme, or Penrith will add about 5 minutes each, so a total of 15 minutes compared wth a non-stop Preston - Carlisle run. When you consider the amount of money spent on infrastructure improvements to gain a few seconds, throwing away minutes on unnecessary stops is utter madness.

Plus adding 15 minutes each way means 30 minutes on a round trip, so a whole extra 400m train to buy and run round in circulation all day, every day.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Making all trains stop everywhere is lazy and inefficient. There is a direct link between faster journey times and increased patronage = increased revenue. Compared to passing through non-stop, a call at Lancaster, Oxenholme, or Penrith will add about 5 minutes each, so a total of 15 minutes compared wth a non-stop Preston - Carlisle run. When you consider the amount of money spent on infrastructure improvements to gain a few seconds, throwing away minutes on unnecessary stops is utter madness.

it’s just easier to keep The WCML service From London to Glasgow via Birmingham and HS2 provide the fast service north of Wigan

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

isn't a section of HS2 seven tracks?

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/532711/C223-CSI-CV-DPP-030-000008-FPD.pdf

so much rail around here. 2 from Leeds and the Kingsbury Road Railhead, then the 4 tracked mainline from Interchange, two tracks to Birmingham and then 2 tracks from Leeds spur.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Making all trains stop everywhere is lazy and inefficient. There is a direct link between faster journey times and increased patronage = increased revenue. Compared to passing through non-stop, a call at Lancaster, Oxenholme, or Penrith will add about 5 minutes each, so a total of 15 minutes compared wth a non-stop Preston - Carlisle run. When you consider the amount of money spent on infrastructure improvements to gain a few seconds, throwing away minutes on unnecessary stops is utter madness.

I'd remind you that speed is not the primary purpose of HS2, rather capacity and reliability.