HS2 Northern Branches Discussion

[nerd]

I love how he uses the nominal fare increase to make the far sound enormous, but then doesn't account for the fact that inflation will rise considerably over the next 20 years.

By then we will likely have £5 coins and the penny will be long gone.

all the economic modelling for HS2 Ltd has worked on the assumpton that High Speed ticket prices and classic ticket prices will be the same. Hence, the ticket revenue for HS2 has been calculated by taking current ticket revenue and inflating by a standard annual factor.

That said, almost all high speed services elsewhere in the world carry a fare supplement; British Rail (as was) were most unusual in introducing the 'high speed' Intercity 125 services with no supplement.

The reasons for this seem political rather than economic. Most High Speed rail does not cover its operating costs; so each seat is subsidised. Most countries seem to feel that equity demands that passengers benefitting from an extra subsidy should pay an extra fare.

HS2 Ltd, by contrast, appear to be planning on the basis that HS2 (once phase 2 is completed), will cover its operating costs (though not of course its capital costs). If so, they may be able to get away with not charging a supplement, which in turn means that they are likely to be better able to fill their trains.

 

[JamesRowden]

Oops.... either way the cost of the power required is effectively irrelevent, as I said, 30p per single ticket on said trainsets.

EDIT:

I remember why I assume that energy per unit distance will only scale linearly with velocity.

It is because I use the approximation, which is suitable for low-ish speeds, that aerodynamic drag is a minor factor and that the primary factor in power demand will be rolling resistance and not air resistance. (This may or may not have an effect when we talk about trains as long as the ones we are considering for HS2)

I have found a document with data for a 9-car pendolino at http://www.rssb.co.uk/sitecollectiondocuments/pdf/reports/research/T712_anxE.pdf.

The formula is:

Resistance (N) = 5311 + 21.696 v + 0.9097 v2

Resistance in N, V in km/h

This means that to run at a constant speed of 200 km/h (~125mph) the output energy per km would need to be: 46.0 MJ/km (12.8 kWh/km)

At 400 km/h (~250mph) it would be: 160 MJ/km (44.4 kWh/km)

If I use an 18 car pendolino to model your 400m train, I guess that the linear and constant forces will be directly proportional to the train lenght while the square component will remain constant (since it represents the air resistance, although it in reality it would incresase because their is a square component to friction force (High speeds are required to make it signinicant).

Using the 18-car pendolino model:

200 km/h (~125mph): 55.7 MJ/km (15.5 kWh/km)
400 km/h (~250mph): 174 MJ/km(48.2 kWh/km)

I could not find the price per kWh that the rail industry gets but I saw that the Manufacturing industry has to pay about 8p/kwh.

This means that for the distance from London to Birmingham (163km), ignroing acceleration and deccaleration, the energy costs are:

200 km/h (~125mph): £202 (881 seats and so 22.9p per passenger, assuming all seats used)
400 km/h (~250mph): £629 (881 seats and so 71.4p per passenger, assuming all seats used)

People are welcome to check my figures to see if I have made a mistake somewhere. But figures confirm your statement that energy usage is not presently a financial issue with high speed rail (I have forgooton to inlcude electrical transmission losses, these will increase the required input energy). Tempting people out of their cars would probably save more energy than the additional energy that the line would use. An issue left is how much will the 250mph stock cost?

 

[tbtc]

I love how he uses the nominal fare increase to make the far sound enormous, but then doesn't account for the fact that inflation will rise considerably over the next 20 years.

By then we will likely have £5 coins and the penny will be long gone.

Off topic, but the current penny is worth less than the half penny was worth when it was withdrawn from circulation (if that makes sense)

 

[Metrailway]

all the economic modelling for HS2 Ltd has worked on the assumpton that High Speed ticket prices and classic ticket prices will be the same. Hence, the ticket revenue for HS2 has been calculated by taking current ticket revenue and inflating by a standard annual factor.

That said, almost all high speed services elsewhere in the world carry a fare supplement; British Rail (as was) were most unusual in introducing the 'high speed' Intercity 125 services with no supplement.

The reasons for this seem political rather than economic. Most High Speed rail does not cover its operating costs; so each seat is subsidised. Most countries seem to feel that equity demands that passengers benefitting from an extra subsidy should pay an extra fare.

HS2 Ltd, by contrast, appear to be planning on the basis that HS2 (once phase 2 is completed), will cover its operating costs (though not of course its capital costs). If so, they may be able to get away with not charging a supplement, which in turn means that they are likely to be better able to fill their trains.

Margaret Hodge, Chair of the Public Accounts Committee in October criticised the assumption that no premium price will be charged (thus, inflating passenger numbers):

http://www.rail.co.uk/blog/public-accounts-committee-said-franchising-civil-servants-hs2-thinking-was-bonkers-shocking/

“Well, that’s wrong. That’s crazy. If you haven’t assumed a premium price and you know it’ll cost more, that is bonkers...... Your modelling is really quite shocking. It seems to me that you are biasing the modelling assumptions, because you’re putting in a modelling assumption that there will not be a premium price, to demonstrate your additional passenger numbers.”

The TGV charged no premium when it opened. This was a political decision as French President, Francois Mitterand, was a socialist and insisted that the TGV service were for ordinary citizens, not just business travellers.

I think the current government have stated in the past that HS2 will be for business travellers. I guess it depends on who gets in when HS2 opens (in 2033?)

 

[johnb]

There is also the fact that the energy required to accelerate to full speed will be four times as high because kinetic energy also squares with speed.

Regenerative braking much?

 

[JamesRowden]

Regenerative braking much?

Regenerative braking systems do suffer losses and so even with regenerative braking, acceleration and deccaleration will cost some energy overall.

 

[Chris125]

Is it me or is this scheme almost designed to make running a through service from Scotland and/or Tyneside with intermediate city stops as difficult as possible? Any such service would have to stop and reverse everywhere. Spurs everywhere are going to mean lots of half empty trains.

HS2 will work in exactly the same way as our existing mainlines do for most long distance services out of London - a trunk route with various branches to serve cities like Liverpool, Manchester, Birmingham and Leeds en-route. This reflects passenger flows which are generally heaviest to and from the capital.

Chris

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

With the time factor proposed for HS2 line completion, noting my current age, the only infrastructural matter to occupy my mind will be the design and style of my mausoleum.....:roll:

 

[jimm]

I wasn't suggesting that. Read my post again - I say Oxford-Bedford services use Bletchley as an interchange (exactly what you say with the four minute trip). I don't expect via Oxford-Bedford services to run via MKC - I expect all other long-distance services to do so. I'm arguing against a reversal at Bletchley for MKC-Sheffield or similar services as other posters suggested and I'm saying there should be classic compatible services running from MKC and other WCML stations onto HS2 via chords at Tamworth and Lichfield.

It'll still have a large number of level crossings and the all-stations hourly shuttle will still operate which will erode capacity significantly (I agree with retaining it though).

I have read your post again - and the subsequent one - and I'm still not sure what you mean. You said

I would expect longer distance services to run via MKC

Just to be clear what I'm on about. Any new XC-style long-distance services from the East Midlands. Yorkshire, etc, to Bristol or the South Coast are most likely to make one MK stop only, at Bletchley. Going to MKC carries a minimum 15-minute penalty to get there and back, by which time a train would be half way to Oxford or Bedford. And if you are concerned about the lack of a direct MKC-Bedford line connection, buy up the sheds on the land needed, flatten them and lay the track to create a triangle.

As for these HS2 chord services, on non-existent chords, where are these trains going to operate from? Northampton, MKC, Euston? If the latter, then it would involve super-high-speed trains travelling for miles on, er, the WCML, which would rather defeat the object of the exercise....

If you think the level crossings are going to survive, think again. On a project of this scale, and in line with the aim of reducing the number of level crossings on the network, it's a fair bet that the money will be built in to put in new bridges/divert roads to new bridges. They are not just going to be tinkering around with the Bletchley to Bedford section. Chiltern are eliminating pretty much all the level crossings between Oxford and Bicester bar the one at Bicester Town station, where everything will stop anyway. Yes the stoppers will use some capacity in Marston Vale but with extra signals, pathing them out of Bletchley and Bedford right behind a fast, etc, you minimise the impact.

Once EWR is up it's possible that LM will stop more services at Bletchley, especially if it's their franchise that is expanded to cover the Reading/Oxford to Bedford services; they already operate the Bletchley-Bedford service.

It won't be the LM franchise that gets extended. Chiltern and FGW both fancy a bit of the action, before you even bring an expanded XC network into the picture. Bedford-Bletchley is LM at present because, in its current situation, it doesn't sit with anything else. East-West changes that state of affairs completely.

 

[steamdrivenand]

Is it me or is this scheme almost designed to make running a through service from Scotland and/or Tyneside with intermediate city stops as difficult as possible? Any such service would have to stop and reverse everywhere. Spurs everywhere are going to mean lots of half empty trains.

Well, as far as travelling from Edinburgh or Glasgow is concerned don't forget that HS2 as proposed doesn't even reach halfway yet, so presumably there'll be more intermediate stations to come if it goes further north.

As currently proposed travelling via the eastern side of the 'Y' Leeds and Birmingham Central would be on spurs, but Meadowhall, Toton, Birmingham Inter. and Old Oak are not. Via the western side both Manchester stations are on a spur as is the aforesaid Birmingham Central, but Birmingham Inter. and Old Oak aren't. For Scotland's purposes Crewe is only a Compatible stop, so it doesn't really count.

Maybe the fact that the eastern side has less spurs might be a factor in the Scottish Government's decision on which side they'll opt to connect with. It would certainly make sense as the English north east could be linked to the same line. There's not such a highly populated area on the English west side.

Maybe the fact that those stations with spurs are in city centres could be seen as an advantage from a business access point of view. So far HS2 has avoided the high cost and other issues of ploughing right through the middle of substantial conurbations, which is what the Victorians did, but the cities were tiny then compared to now and electoral representation fairly thin on the ground. The spurs reduce those problems by 50%.

I'm left wondering whether the western side of HS2 will forever remain as currently planned and that Phase 3 will be all eastern, linking Edinburgh and the North East into the network with Glasgow connected by it's own high speed spur.

If that is the case it does leave one wondering why they initially chose to head west to Birmingham which was always going to end up with a zig zag line up the country and additional construction miles. A more central northerly route with spurs off might have been a better option. Maybe that's another problem about building something like this in phases. You end up with each phase having to aim for somewhere 'important', which may not be where the overall project needs to be. A product of short termism maybe.

 

[PR1Berske]

It certainly looks as though "HS3" currently has three options, and you steamdrivenand have hinted at all of them!

HS3 - Option 1

HS line from Yorkshire to Newcastle and Edinburgh with a Glasgow spur. The western route to go from Wigan to Carlisle with (possibly) upgraded WCML from there to Glasgow

HS3 - Option 2

HS line from Yorkshire to Newcastle and Edinburgh. HS line from Wigan to Glasgow. Upgraded Glasgow to Edinburgh line, but not necessarily HS

HS3 - Option 3

HS line from Yorkshire to Newcastle, from here an upgraded line to Edinburgh. HS line from Wigan to Glasgow, intermediate station at/near/around Carlisle as a "Northern Hub".

 

[steamdrivenand]

An example of how south-centric people can be.

When I lived and worked in North Yorkshire I had a boss in London who decided he wanted me to run and expand our operation in Scotland. He reasoned that as I lived in Yorkshire 'Edinburgh and Glasgow weren't far away'.

He didn't seem to understand when I pointed out that there was a famous sign on the ECML just north of York which marked the point halfway between London and Edinburgh and I lived south of it.

And that reminds me of a sales rep for the Highland and Islands who stood up at one of our sales conferences and advised the assembled throng that his patch was 20% of the landmass of Britain and that the other 119 reps in the sales force covered the other 80%.

 

[nerd]

It certainly looks as though "HS3" currently has three options, and you steamdrivenand have hinted at all of them!

HS3 - Option 1

HS line from Yorkshire to Newcastle and Edinburgh with a Glasgow spur. The western route to go from Wigan to Carlisle with (possibly) upgraded WCML from there to Glasgow

HS3 - Option 2

HS line from Yorkshire to Newcastle and Edinburgh. HS line from Wigan to Glasgow. Upgraded Glasgow to Edinburgh line, but not necessarily HS

HS3 - Option 3

HS line from Yorkshire to Newcastle, from here an upgraded line to Edinburgh. HS line from Wigan to Glasgow, intermediate station at/near/around Carlisle as a "Northern Hub".

Options 1 and 2 are broadly correnct;

Option 1 would involve crossing the border at Coldstream and then going round Edinburgh with a spur into a city-centre station at Haymarket. The main HS2 line would carry on to Glasgow High Street.

Option 2 would involve a delta junction at Carstairs, so that trains could run at high speed from Haymarket to High Street.

Option 3 is like Option 2 within Scotland, but then crosses the Pennines through Haltwhistle, and joins the eastern arm of HS2 south of the Newcastle spur.

 

[sheff'd victoria]

Unless you know something that the rest of us don't and Sheffield is losing its existing rail services when HS2 opens, I don't understand your point. HS2 is not primarily designed for people to commute to work in the city centre. It's designed for fast inter-regional transport.

The vast majority of people who work in the centre of Sheffield will live relatively nearby and travel in by local train, bus, tram or car. Those traveling on HS from London or Birmingham are more likely to be visiting businesses outside the city and have to interchange to complete the journey anyway.

Perhaps you could expand on your views in the spirit of friendly debate and exclude the mildly condescending tone?

Id like to know where people are going to park at this HS2 station at ( Sheffield Meadow " Hell ).

Christmas is bedlam on the roads around their at the best of times, if we start digging a tunnel now we could have a HS2 underground station in Sheffield in 20 years or so

 

[steamdrivenand]

Id like to know where people are going to park at this HS2 station at ( Sheffield Meadow " Hell ).

Christmas is bedlam on the roads around their at the best of times, if we start digging a tunnel now we could have a HS2 underground station in Sheffield in 20 years or so

I haven't looked out specifically for the parking issue at Meadowhall but the DfT have published the Consultant Engineering reports on all the different line options, station options and depot options they considered and there are schematic drawings of the stations included. They might answer your questions.

 

[daniel3982]

The plan is to build a 3000 space multi-story carpark next to the station (on the current wasteground next to the viaduct) as spell as some vague talk about junction improvements.

I agree, it's going to be traffic hell there (it already is!).

 

[PR1Berske]

Options 1 and 2 are broadly correnct;

Option 1 would involve crossing the border at Coldstream and then going round Edinburgh with a spur into a city-centre station at Haymarket. The main HS2 line would carry on to Glasgow High Street.

Option 2 would involve a delta junction at Carstairs, so that trains could run at high speed from Haymarket to High Street.

Option 3 is like Option 2 within Scotland, but then crosses the Pennines through Haltwhistle, and joins the eastern arm of HS2 south of the Newcastle spur.

I considered my plans with only a cursory glance at the map so I'm thankful for your response

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

There is the main HS2 thread and this one is for HS2 branches.

Are we not getting somewhat ahead of ourselves with HS3 discussions...or should a separate thread to opened to cover matters on that particular subject. What is the start date for HS3 ?

Just an idle observation at 0038 hours...:roll:

 

[joeykins82]

Surely HS3 would be an entirely new route; the Glasgow/Edinburgh extension of HS2 would be HS2 phase 3.

Just my pedantry at 0934

 

[steamdrivenand]

Surely HS3 would be an entirely new route; the Glasgow/Edinburgh extension of HS2 would be HS2 phase 3.

Just my pedantry at 0934

That's what I thought too @ 12.25

 

[sheff'd victoria]

I haven't looked out specifically for the parking issue at Meadowhall but the DfT have published the Consultant Engineering reports on all the different line options, station options and depot options they considered and there are schematic drawings of the stations included.

Everytime the Dft pubish something I get worried

The plan is to build a 3000 space multi-story carpark next to the station (on the current wasteground next to the viaduct) as spell as some vague talk about junction improvements.

I agree, it's going to be traffic hell there (it already is!).

The waste ground which is used as an overflow for parking at Chrismas ?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely HS3 would be an entirely new route; the Glasgow/Edinburgh extension of HS2 would be HS2 phase 3.

Exactly so, so why not open a separate HS3 thread (of any methodology so chosen) specifically for the benefit of those who want to make their views known on that particular matter (as has been the case with some of the more recent postings on this thread) and not to clog up this thread which, as the title of the thread clearly states, is concerned with HS2 Northern Branches, which are those lines to the terminal stations in both Leeds and Manchester.

I only put the time on at the end of my last posting as I had been awake for over 24 hours in considerable pain suffering from the after-effects of the medical procedures that had been carried out on me this week.....

 

[JohnB57]

Id like to know where people are going to park at this HS2 station at ( Sheffield Meadow " Hell ).

Christmas is bedlam on the roads around their at the best of times, if we start digging a tunnel now we could have a HS2 underground station in Sheffield in 20 years or so

Whereas driving and parking into the city centre is a breeze?

Like it or not - and you clearly won't - it's interchange, park and ride, modal transfer, call it what you will - that provides any justification at all for the line stopping anywhere near Sheffield. As a city, it simply cannot provide economic levels of use. That has to be serviced from a much wider area.

If HS2 is easy, it will attract some new business. If it's affordable, it will attract some new business. If it's easy and affordable, it will attract optimum levels of new business. And without a number of well spaced, well located parkway stations, such as Meadowhall and Toton, it's just an expensive train set. You think they haven't considered better accessibility at such locations?

 

[steamdrivenand]

Commiserations Paul.

However if we're discussing where the lines go after Phase 2 then I guess they're going to head north and therefore come within the threads definition if they're called HS2 Phase 3.

However if they become HS3, which would seem odd for what might be two different lines, one heading away from Manchester and one from Leeds, then maybe another thread would be apprpriate. However the DfT haven't given any clue to future naming of any extensions after Phase 2.

On the other hand I still think they should renumber them with HS1 becoming HS2 and HS2 becoming HS5 and the NW branch becoming HS6 and the NE branch HS1. Tying in with the DfT numbering of roads.

If they ever built another London link from Toton area that would also be HS1 and the very unlikely extension Crewe to Holyhead would be the top end of HS5.

HS4 would be to Bath/Bristol and South Wales with HS3 heading southwest, splitting to become HS30 to Soton and HS35 to Plymouth. HS 25 would split from the current HS1 around Ebbsfleet and serve Sevenoaks, East Grinstead and Brighton.

 

[tbtc]

I still think they should renumber them with HS1 becoming HS2 and HS2 becoming HS5 and the NW branch becoming HS6 and the NE branch HS1. Tying in with the DfT numbering of roads

As I've said before, they should be numbered in BR fashion.

HS65 from London to Manchester and Birmingham. HS26 for the Leeds/ Newcastle route.

(why did BR timetables work anti clockwise from the north bank of the Thames when the road network generally goes clockwise?)

 

[steamdrivenand]

(why did BR timetables work anti clockwise from the north bank of the Thames when the road network generally goes clockwise?)

Was it a pre-Grouping thing?

 

[tbtc]

Was it a pre-Grouping thing?

I don't honestly know.

The Rail way of doing it seems more logical than the road way (since there's a clear start and end point (north bank of the Thames to the south bank of the Thames), though I like the road way of having key numbers for the main roads (when on the railways there are some busy/key routes with fairly unmemorable numbers).

 

[RichmondCommu]

Sadly I fear that Toton HS2 will fare little better than the current East Midlands Parkway. The A52 and M1 are heavily congested during the peak and although the A52 passes over Toton sidings there is no direct link. Trying to improve road access will be lengthy and very disruptive. Not only that but for many customers that extra journey time to Toton will cancel out the time saving on HS2. Given that HS2 will be a premium rate service many customers will simply to stick to a upgraded MML (electric trains and 125mph running).

In my opinion we should have paid far more attention to the SNCF and DB and used trains that would be compatible with classic lines. Split trains could run to both Nottingham and Derby and run a limited service to London. I agree that at some point these train would need to be split but there is no reason why this couldn't be done in Birmingham. I think we are in danger of over estimating the demand for HS2 in the East Midlands.

 

[Chris125]

Not only that but for many customers that extra journey time to Toton will cancel out the time saving on HS2. Given that HS2 will be a premium rate service many customers will simply to stick to a upgraded MML (electric trains and 125mph running).

If HS2 was opening tomorrow, MML services remained unchanged, and no effort was made to fill the 1000+ seats per HS2 trainset you might have a point but your not taking into account the capacity situation in 20 years time - duplicating HS2 services is a luxury unlikely to be affordable. Changes to service frequencies and stopping patterns are inevitable and will help spread the benefits while making the most of the extra capacity.

Chris

 

[Kettledrum]

Sadly I fear that Toton HS2 will fare little better than the current East Midlands Parkway. The A52 and M1 are heavily congested during the peak and although the A52 passes over Toton sidings there is no direct link. Trying to improve road access will be lengthy and very disruptive. Not only that but for many customers that extra journey time to Toton will cancel out the time saving on HS2....... I think we are in danger of over estimating the demand for HS2 in the East Midlands.

I agree it's a real risk, and that additional infrastructure will be needed to make Toton easier to get to. This must include:

- improving road access, not just from the A52,
- extending the tram from Nottingham,
- building a tram link the other way into Derby
- having platforms for classic services to stop at Toton for trains from Derby, Nottingham, East Midlands Parkway and further afield to stop, so Toton is more of an inter-change.

The good news is there is 20 years to put the additional infrastructure in place.