Alex McKenna
Member
- Joined
- 5 Mar 2011
- Messages
- 29
If somebody actually WANTS to go to Euston, there's still the WCML. Crossrail give you so many more options.
depends on what it is restricted to. I would say a max of 320 kph which is more or less what other high speed lines run at. The difference in time saved between that and 360 kph is small but the energy used is large. Remember that energy will be effect every train, every day. The savings could be huge in ongoing running costs
Possibly 100% classic compatible trains
Yes, and I strongly think that Handsacre will go as its a white elephant that has little use if it gets to Crewe so bin it and go straight there, will save near enough £5-600 million on that alone.What is NPR? Northern Powerhouse?
BTW i have long felt the bit beyond Birmingham to be very unlikely to happen
Yes, and I strongly think that Handsacre will go as its a white elephant that has little use if it gets to Crewe so bin it and go straight there, will save near enough £5-600 million on that alone.
Nope, I used the options from the original post I quoted from another forum member.I suspect the options have been chosen to attempt to skew the result. I.e. three very similar options (Birmingham / Phase 1 / Crewe) to 'split the vote' against the scrapping altogether option.
Basically, gives people a vague get out clause along the lines of "we have decided it is better to go to Crewe in one go to save money by removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke) but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"Would that mean either a delay until phase 2a was built, or more likely (given that it's just for about a year) start with the Birmingham services and then move more services over once HS2 reaches Crewe?
Basically, gives people a vague get out clause along the lines of "we have decided it is better to go to Crewe in one go to save money by removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke) but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"
Whilst i agree the options are bizarre and not thought through at all, my two penneth based on what I have said elsewhere...
Phase 1, Euston to Birmingham spur, but the link at Handsacre will get killed off so Stafford, Stoke and Macclesfield get nothing. Phase 2A becomes 1A and it opens to Crewe. Phase 2 to the North East is massively curtailed, it will drop out on the Derby lines at Kingsbury or it gets to Toton, no further. Phase 2 to the North West gets renamed to NPR so it shifts the money on to someone else's books. Through station at Piccadilly so London Leeds is via Manchester but NPRs problem, not HS2. Some sort of new massive NPR parkway station Newton le Willows way. All trains to Scotland come off at Crewe with no link to the WCML further north.
Perhaps the engineering connection near Stone could be beefed up as an alternative route to Stoke and Macclesfield (sorry Stafford). A long deceleration lane on the down with a maximum speed turnout, and an additional chord to join the up. Personally for Stafford I'd create a classic connection on approach to Birmingham and drop off half sets at Interchange for New Street, Wolverhampton and Stafford.... removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke)
I fail to see any alternative to two pairs of TBMs heading out in opposite directions from the OOC trench simultaneously, so the tunnels going both ways ought to be ready around the same time at least, even if Euston station takes a bit longer. Once passenger train operations start at OOC, I can't see subsequent launching and supplying of further TBMs from the same trench is going to be viable, so not starting the Euston tunnels at the same time as those heading north could render future extensions further east impossible unless the TBMs involved were launched and supplied from the other end, which might rule out going to Euston at all, and will certainly be at far greater cost than simply using the materials handling operation already planned for OOC.but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"
Basically, gives people a vague get out clause along the lines of "we have decided it is better to go to Crewe in one go to save money by removing Handsacre (sorry Stoke) but it will take another 18 months before we can open it, have some trains from Old Oak to Curzon St first"
It is always going to be restricted speed. Remember E=MC^2, the question is only ever what it is restricted too.What is the point of delivering any part of HS2 if it's going to be restricted speed?
If there were fewer trains then the OOC site wouldn't need to be enlarged.How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?
Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?
Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?
How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?
Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?
Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?
What is the point of delivering any part of HS2 if it's going to be restricted speed?
Capacity.
The main purpose of HS2 is to provide an extra pair of fast lines on the south WCML for reasons of capacity.
To increase capacity
Why do people insist on sending trains to the East Midlands and Yorkshire via Birmingham or Cambridge, places thirty or forty miles to the side of the direct path? HS2 runs London-Birmingham-Manchester without intermediate stops. HS-X (could be 3, 4, 5 or something else entirely) should be London-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds without intermediate stops.heading roughly along the M11 corridor with intermediate stops at Stansted Airport and Cambridge North
It is always going to be restricted speed. Remember E=MC^2, the question is only ever what it is restricted too.
They layout of the engineering depot at Stone isn't conducive to that, it would need a complete new flying junction and chord.Perhaps the engineering connection near Stone could be beefed up as an alternative route to Stoke and Macclesfield (sorry Stafford). A long deceleration lane on the down with a maximum speed turnout, and an additional chord to join the up. Personally for Stafford I'd create a classic connection on approach to Birmingham and drop off half sets at Interchange for New Street, Wolverhampton and Stafford.
One per hour, originally a Liverpool train calling at Stafford and Crewe which got changed as the second Liverpool via phase 2a caught it up. It got changed to a Stafford, Stoke, Macclesfield terminator. If the Leeds and further north trains were via Manchester then the platform requirement shouldn't be any different.How many trains were planed to use Handsacre after the completion of phase 2a?
Wouldn't terminating at OOC require a larger station therefore reducing the land available for regeneration?
Also if the eastern arm is scrapped how many platforms would be needed at Euston for Brirmingham, Manchester, Liverpool and Scottish services minus the Leeds and Newcastle services?
Scrap this waste of money of a project and inject the rest of the money into more electrification for deferred projects and crossrail
I’m a taxi driver and talking o a passenger the other day, was interesting to hear from outside the enthusiast fraternity that the word on the street is that HS2 etc wont go ahead, will get binned, he said a lot of his colleagues don think it will go ahead, and i agree, with 100 billion cost its just way too high, and can see it being white elephant as if seats are too cheap it will never cover itself and if say 30 pounds extra will most people pay that to save 20 mins or less and end up only in Birmingham, then conventional lines, so lose any big time savings, and all the economic benefits are ropey to say the least, it may be of economic benefit to Birmingham and there it will stop having big impact, I’m not sure the country can afford it, as my passenger said with Brexit and possible financial implications that money may be needed to shore up the economy, rather than a 100 billion spent on HS2, I personally would back it if it was going to Scotland or would only coast say 30 billion but its getting to the stage where the economic return etc is massively exceeded by the cost.
Why do people insist on sending trains to the East Midlands and Yorkshire via Birmingham or Cambridge, places thirty or forty miles to the side of the direct path? HS2 runs London-Birmingham-Manchester without intermediate stops. HS-X (could be 3, 4, 5 or something else entirely) should be London-Nottingham-Sheffield-Leeds without intermediate stops.
I think you are using the wrong equation for the situation. I normally see that used to calculate the energy output from nuclear fission/fusion, it equates mass and energy, and tells you a quantity of mass can be changed to a (large) quantity of energy.
What you need is Newtonian dynamics, force = mass x acceleration, and power = force x speed if you want to look at the limits of energy consumption and associated running costs.