HS2 frequency to remain at 18 trains per hour confirms minister

[Jorge Da Silva]

Modern Railways June 2020: page 14:

The HS2 minister confirmed to the House of Commons transport committee that HS2 will not be cut to 14tph as recommended by the review and will remain at 18tph.

 

[quantinghome]

Modern Railways June 2020: page 14:

The HS2 minister confirmed to the House of Commons transport committee that HS2 will not be cut to 14tph as recommended by the review and will remain at 18tph.

Good. No point saving a small % on the construction cost to cut capacity by over 20%.

 

[Ianno87]

Good. No point saving a small % on the construction cost to cut capacity by over 20%.

Not just capacity.

18tph down to 14tph means that 4 trains each hour to somewhere and/or somewhere else can't run. Who would lose out in that cut?

More capacity designed in now means more choices available (and less difficult choices) in 10-20 years time.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

Not just capacity.

18tph down to 14tph means that 4 trains each hour to somewhere and/or somewhere else can't run. Who would lose out in that cut?

More capacity designed in now means more choices available (and less difficult choices) in 10-20 years time.

Transport minister said it was not worth cutting. IMO it was a good call. Think it was unlikely to be cut when the handscare Junction was kept in the scheme.

 

[HSTEd]

Worst comes to worst, if the timetable is unreliable it can be cut later.

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

at least the infrastructure allows 18tph. 6tph is reported initially from December 2029 to Old Oak then increased to 10tph from December 2031 with services running to Euston.

From December 2035 it goes to 17tph.

 

[si404]

18tph down to 14tph means that 4 trains each hour to somewhere and/or somewhere else can't run. Who would lose out in that cut?

I believe the plan was to not bother with Handsacre junction, and ditch the London-Newcastle trains. Birmingham-Newcastle was still in though, and probably the York portion, so HS2 would have still been built to Church Fenton. No intermediate stops would have seen a drop in frequency, other than OOC.

So it would have been Euston to
2tph Crewe-Liverpool/Lancashire
2tph Preston-Scotland
3tph Manchester
1tph Macclesfield
3tph Birmingham
1tph 'reserved for growth'
2tph Leeds
1tph Leeds / Sheffield
1tph York / Sheffield
2tph Newcastle

I think it worth pointing out that the 18tph is 14*400m, 3*200m and 1*0m train length. It was these shorter trains that were to be ditched.

The Newcastle's could have been saved by changing the service pattern on the eastern branch from 6tph via Toton with 2tph not stopping, and 2tph splitting into 4tph all splitting there - but when York is only a 27m time saving, adding 10 minutes for a stop with a split/join doesn't give much speed benefit for the line north of there. But 1tph Leeds / Sheffield, 1tph York / Sheffield and 2tph Newcastle / Leeds is theoretically possible (though cuts Leeds capacity by 40% and presumably means there's a roughly half-hour gap in service at some point in the hour).

 

[Ianno87]

I believe the plan was to not bother with Handsacre junction, and ditch the London-Newcastle trains. Birmingham-Newcastle was still in though, and probably the York portion, so HS2 would have still been built to Church Fenton. No intermediate stops would have seen a drop in frequency, other than OOC.

So it would have been Euston to
2tph Crewe-Liverpool/Lancashire
2tph Preston-Scotland
3tph Manchester
1tph Macclesfield
3tph Birmingham
1tph 'reserved for growth'
2tph Leeds
1tph Leeds / Sheffield
1tph York / Sheffield
2tph Newcastle

I think it worth pointing out that the 18tph is 14*400m, 3*200m and 1*0m train length. It was these shorter trains that were to be ditched.

The Newcastle's could have been saved by changing the service pattern on the eastern branch from 6tph via Toton with 2tph not stopping, and 2tph splitting into 4tph all splitting there - but when York is only a 27m time saving, adding 10 minutes for a stop with a split/join doesn't give much speed benefit for the line north of there. But 1tph Leeds / Sheffield, 1tph York / Sheffield and 2tph Newcastle / Leeds is theoretically possible (though cuts Leeds capacity by 40% and presumably means there's a roughly half-hour gap in service at some point in the hour).

Illustrating my point very nicely - your solition puts the 'hit' on Leeds for which (without 18tph capability) there would *never* be an opportunity to come back and fix.

 

[MotCO]

I think it worth pointing out that the 18tph is 14*400m, 3*200m and 1*0m train length. It was these shorter trains that were to be ditched.

That's quite a short train

 

[dan4291]

That's quite a short train

Ghost train?

 

[Ianno87]

That's quite a short train

Ghost train?

It's a reserved path for future growth, i.e. no actual train in it for the purposes of the business case but presumably demonstrating a small amount of further potential should anyone choose to use it.

 

[Purple Orange]

It's a reserved path for future growth, i.e. no actual train in it for the purposes of the business case but presumably demonstrating a small amount of further potential should anyone choose to use it.

Manchester-Paris via HS1-HS2 link

 

[Nym]

There's an HS1-HS2 link now?

 

[Ianno87]

There's an HS1-HS2 link now?

No.

In any case, the commercial case for any 18th path is likely best to/from Euston, e.g. as a peak extra or something.

 

[si404]

Manchester-Paris via HS1-HS2 link

What about the other 12 hours? it's an hourly path not a every 3 or 4 hours path!

We're looking at either new destinations (North Wales?) Or boosting Manchester, Birmingham or Leeds as a use for that path.

There's an HS1-HS2 link now?

I can just about, with Heathrow expansion and a load of other stuff going on, diverting Javelins to Heathrow and beyond via Euston-St Pancras, Marylebone and Old Oak Common. Still not sure there's enough demand there. And certainly there's more local demand for using the alignment through Camden for London Overground than for intercity/international trains, but even then the case isn't going to be that good.

 

[Nym]

If nothing else, having some route, somewhere to get UIC GC+ gauge trains between HS1 and HS2 would be kinda helpful to have.

Imagine our shiny new trains being delivered from Germany (we can hope), they come through the tunnel, up HS1, get taken off the rails, put on a lorry and then taken to HS2, doesn't that just sound a bit thick?

Moderator note: can we stick to the topic 'HS2 frequency to remain at 18 trains per hour confirms minister' please. If anyone wishes to make any proposals for additional links, please create a thread in Speculative Ideas, thanks.

 

[edwin_m]

If nothing else, having some route, somewhere to get UIC GC+ gauge trains between HS1 and HS2 would be kinda helpful to have.

Imagine our shiny new trains being delivered from Germany (we can hope), they come through the tunnel, up HS1, get taken off the rails, put on a lorry and then taken to HS2, doesn't that just sound a bit thick?

If they are all classic compatible as expected, then it should be possible to take them by some route from the Tunnel to Birmingham where they can transfer to HS2 at Washwood Heath depot where they will be based. If captive stock is ordered for Phase 2b then it might have to come in by road.

 

[43096]

How many high speed lines are running 18tph currently, or are planning to?

 

[Bald Rick]

How many high speed lines are running 18tph currently, or are planning to?

Just the one planning to - HS2.

LGV-PSE is upgrading to 15tph now. One of the Shinkansen is there already IIRC. It’s all in the HS2 Oakervee review.

 

[cle]

What about the other 12 hours? it's an hourly path not a every 3 or 4 hours path!

We're looking at either new destinations (North Wales?) Or boosting Manchester, Birmingham or Leeds as a use for that path.
I can just about, with Heathrow expansion and a load of other stuff going on, diverting Javelins to Heathrow and beyond via Euston-St Pancras, Marylebone and Old Oak Common. Still not sure there's enough demand there. And certainly there's more local demand for using the alignment through Camden for London Overground than for intercity/international trains, but even then the case isn't going to be that good.

Consider it all like Gares du Nord/de l'Est - easy enough to transfer. I can't see the need for these regional Ashford - OOC Javelins which some have mentioned, and even how they would route. The tunnel to OOC would not support them, due to our 18tph (!) - and I can't see the NLL working either, even via a quadded Camden Road and Queens Park which might be easier, but be on the wrong lines to loop back to OOC at Willesden.

 

[si404]

I can't see the need for these regional Ashford - OOC Javelins which some have mentioned

Nor can I, but it's the most justifiable extension of HS1 - Kent trains to Old Oak Common and Heathrow, and Heathrow gets its Euston/St Pancras link. Dedicated tracks from Airport Junction (to eke more out of the GWML*) to St Pancras throat (because you can't not serve the St Pancras area), via Marylebone (better sited than Paddington, gives the same interchanges). It's really not justifiable, but it's more justifiable than blowing a few billion trashing the route through Camden for the sake of a small number of stock movements.

But that is off-topic...

LGV-PSE is upgrading to 15tph now.

Which is good, given it's not that much of an upgrade and a 1970s line.

The GWML Main tracks out from Paddington does 16 or 17tph to Maidenhead (and 20/21 to Airport Junction) at peak times. OK, 125mph top speed, rather than higher speed, and with some 110mph trains (*which is why you might want more tracks to Airport Junction), but it does show that you can run very high frequency intercity service.

 

[Ianno87]

If nothing else, having some route, somewhere to get UIC GC+ gauge trains between HS1 and HS2 would be kinda helpful to have.

Imagine our shiny new trains being delivered from Germany (we can hope), they come through the tunnel, up HS1, get taken off the rails, put on a lorry and then taken to HS2, doesn't that just sound a bit thick?

Moderator note: can we stick to the topic 'HS2 frequency to remain at 18 trains per hour confirms minister' please. If anyone wishes to make any proposals for additional links, please create a thread in Speculative Ideas, thanks.

If they are all classic compatible as expected, then it should be possible to take them by some route from the Tunnel to Birmingham where they can transfer to HS2 at Washwood Heath depot where they will be based. If captive stock is ordered for Phase 2b then it might have to come in by road.

Or the HS2 trains might be assembled in the UK, like the Class 80xs.

Just the one planning to - HS2.

LGV-PSE is upgrading to 15tph now. One of the Shinkansen is there already IIRC. It’s all in the HS2 Oakervee review.

Yes, off memory the Tokyo-Osaka Shinkansen is a fairly metronomic 14tph all day, with 15tph in the peaks. If you count the right hour, there is 16tph in one direction in the morning peak.

The hard limit appears to be the 6 platforms and flat throat at Tokyo station, not the 'plain line' capacity, plus the effect of the "local" Shinkansens pulling in and out of platform loops, overtaken at each one.

 

[cle]

I think that the capacity will be plenty for our population, given how long the trains are, and that traditional trains will still exist to most destinations, giving more capacity and some 'competition'. The plans and stopping patterns enable some wiggle room too, for example if the Macclesfield train doesn't perform, it can be re-allocated.

Plus we won't have the Milton Keynes demand either, which fills trains today.

 

[Nym]

Or the HS2 trains might be assembled in the UK, like the Class 80xs.

At one of these assembly plants, none of which are connected to the HS2 network, or anywhere near it to be able to feasibly be gauge cleared into it?

 

[Ianno87]

At one of these assembly plants, none of which are connected to the HS2 network, or anywhere near it to be able to feasibly be gauge cleared into it?

Even so, will matter not one jot if HS1 is not connected to HS2 in that (entirely feasible) instance.

 

[Bald Rick]

The argument is irrelevant. HS2 is ordering classic compatible trains, and so will be capable of being delivered on the classic network. In the event that ‘captive’ stock is procured, which is as yet not expected, they will get to HS2 in the same way that the Chanel Tunnel locos got to Folkestone from Loughborough.

 

[The Planner]

At one of these assembly plants, none of which are connected to the HS2 network, or anywhere near it to be able to feasibly be gauge cleared into it?

Why will gauge be a problem? They will fit on the classic network anyway. If needs be they come through at Calvert.

 

[miami]

I assume 18tph is from Euston-OOC-Birmingham Interchange (although not all stopping at Interchange).

With 8 platforms at Euston, then 2 lines to OOC (8 platforms), then 2 lines to just south of Birmingham Interchange, which has 4 platforms

3tph then go to Birmingham, leaving 15tph north of the Birmingham spur. Are there 4 tracks from Birmingham spur north to phase 2B? Or does that only allow 3 Birmingham starters

After the East/West split, that 15tph would then be

West 8tph
2tph Crewe-Liverpool/Lancashire
2tph Preston-Scotland
3tph Manchester
1tph Macclesfield

East 6tph
2tph Leeds
1tph Leeds / Sheffield
1tph York / Sheffield
2tph Newcastle

And 1tph reserved

What's the current plan for Birmingham starters heading north (rather than Euston starters)?

Will the East and West route be built for 18tph even though they won't have that many trains?

 

[Jorge Da Silva]

It’s planned 11tph via the Western leg and 7 on the eastern leg

 

[si404]

What's the current plan for Birmingham starters heading north (rather than Euston starters)?

2 Manchester, 1 Scotland. 2 Leeds, 1 Newcastle. Midlands Connect want a Nottingham.

Further North NPR will piggyback on the route so I'd imagine that they'll try and make sure there's plenty spare. It shouldn't be too hard to do other than tunnels.

edit:remove wrong stuff