HS2 Rolling Stock Procurement

[snowball]

Talgo has been scouting locations for a new UK test track if they start manufacturing here with former coal freight lines in Yorkshire and Scotland in the cross hairs. The Scottish, Tyne and Welsh governments are also fighting hard to be the site chosen for manufacturing with offers of financial inducements to set up in former steel industry areas.

The current issue of Rail magazine mentions, as possible sites for this test track, Hunterston and Longannet (I know where they are) and "Parkside in Leeds". Where is this Parkside?

 

[edwin_m]

The current issue of Rail magazine mentions, as possible sites for this test track, Hunterston and Longannet (I know where they are) and "Parkside in Leeds". Where is this Parkside?

A quick search finds an industrial estate of that name close to M621 J5.

 

[snowball]

A quick search finds an industrial estate of that name close to M621 J5.

Surely a test track needs a substantial length of surplus railway. The site you describe is near the Middleton Railway but I hadn't heard they were planning to shut up shop.

 

[edwin_m]

Surely a test track needs a substantial length of surplus railway. The site you describe is near the Middleton Railway but I hadn't heard they were planning to shut up shop.

I don't know, I'm just quoting where the map says it is.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Who says it isn't? You?
Not getting at you personally, but what you (or even a few people on here) think isn't really concerns of HS2 LTD. I mean, it's not acceptable to me that sometimes, the McDonalds Drive Thru is a little slow, but what can I do about it? Nothing. It's just life.

Aren't the "Voyager services" meant to continue on the classic WCML?

 

[WatcherZero]

Seems to have been conflated, its Parkside, Newton-le-willows (St Helens council confirmed they have been approached) and Leeds, not parkside in Leeds.

 

[Chester1]

Aren't the "Voyager services" meant to continue on the classic WCML?

Yes with extra stops.

I wonder if classic compatible units could include a battery to allow them to run between Crewe and Chester with discontinuous electrification? There are 34 bridges over the line and most are listed and some where built in 1840s. Electrifying the line apart from bridges might gain government aproval... Chester could certainly support a HS2 ten coach service every two hours joining and splitting with a Liverpool or Preston service in Crewe. I am bias though...

 

[edwin_m]

I wonder if classic compatible units could include a battery to allow them to run between Crewe and Chester with discontinuous electrification? There are 34 bridges over the line and most are listed and some where built in 1840s. Electrifying the line apart from bridges might gain government aproval... Chester could certainly support a HS2 ten coach service every two hours joining and splitting with a Liverpool or Preston service in Crewe. I am bias though...

No way would HS2 want that sort of complication and extra weight. HS service to Chester will only happen if it is electrified, paid for by someone other than HS2. However there is likely to be a spare half-train every hour that splits off at Crewe with nowhere else to go.

 

[Chester1]

No way would HS2 want that sort of complication and extra weight. HS service to Chester will only happen if it is electrified, paid for by someone other than HS2. However there is likely to be a spare half-train every hour that splits off at Crewe with nowhere else to go.

Full electrification will not happen in the current climate and Crewe - Chester is the ideal line for Grayling's partial electrification "idea" because the cost of providing sufficient clearence would be horrendous. Installing batteries in 4 Pendolinos would enable a two hourly service from Chester to London and allow two extra stops to be added while maintaining a Voyagers journey time. Id like to see a ten coach HS2 service but the only way it would gain funding would be as a massive electoral bribe for North Wales. Any chance of a HS2 set being dragged to Holyhead by a couple of locos? HS2 operator wouldn't like it but if a London-Holyhead/Bangor service was in the franchise spec they wouldn't much of a choice.

 

[The Planner]

It wouldnt be in the HS2 spec, North Wales will always be a change at Crewe or a classic service.

 

[The Planner]

Seems to have been conflated, its Parkside, Newton-le-willows (St Helens council confirmed they have been approached) and Leeds, not parkside in Leeds.

As in the old colliery? Pretty sure we took out the connections and signalling when we resignalled there a few years back.

 

[edwin_m]

As in the old colliery? Pretty sure we took out the connections and signalling when we resignalled there a few years back.

Parkside has been talked about as a freight terminal so someone must think it might be worth doing. A test track would have to be 100% new though.

 

[159]

England is showcasing its ability to be technologically late to the party. The L0 series Maglev, looking to be sold by JR Railways to other countries, as well as being planned for Japanese HS lines, would complete a journey from London to Manchester (equivalent distance from Tokyo to Nagoya) in 40 minutes - HS2 will take nearly twice that time at 1h 5 minutes.

 

[Chester1]

England is showcasing its ability to be technologically late to the party. The L0 series Maglev, looking to be sold by JR Railways to other countries, as well as being planned for Japanese HS lines, would complete a journey from London to Manchester (equivalent distance from Tokyo to Nagoya) in 40 minutes - HS2 will take nearly twice that time at 1h 5 minutes.

Maglev is much more expensive and the trains cannot run on the existing network. It is worth the small cost difference between building a 125mph railway and 250mph (about 10-15%). At best HS2 using Maglex would cost 50% more. The Tokyo - Nagoya will travel at a maximium speed of 314mph but use 4-5 times as much energy. The Shanghai maglev operates at conventional speeds because it is not cost effective to run at its full speed.

 

[WideRanger]

Maglev is much more expensive and the trains cannot run on the existing network. It is worth the small cost difference between building a 125mph railway and 250mph (about 10-15%). At best HS2 using Maglex would cost 50% more. The Tokyo - Nagoya will travel at a maximium speed of 314mph but use 4-5 times as much energy. The Shanghai maglev operates at conventional speeds because it is not cost effective to run at its full speed.

It's worth noting that Japan is hedging its bets on their Maglev - building the basic infrastructure (tunnels, bridges, etc) so that it can be easily converted to conventional Shinkansen if they cannot get the economics of Maglev to stack up. Seems sensible, but would be a shame - their prototype has amazing accelleration - feels similar to a A380 taking off.

 

[edwin_m]

Acceleration can be a mixed blessing. You aren't allowed to get up and move around while an A380 is taking off.

 

[WideRanger]

Acceleration can be a mixed blessing. You aren't allowed to get up and move around while an A380 is taking off.

And people are not allowed to stand on the Maglev test runs either. Which was a dissapointment.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Who says it isn't? You?
Not getting at you personally, but what you (or even a few people on here) think isn't really concerns of HS2 LTD. I mean, it's not acceptable to me that sometimes, the McDonalds Drive Thru is a little slow, but what can I do about it? Nothing. It's just life.

We'll have to see what emerges now more consideration is being given to through running onto the classic network.
I'm just concerned that some services might be poorer (lower frequency and/or longer journeys) than now.
Voyager services (Shrewsbury/Chester/North Wales) are particularly affected by the lack of wires off the WCML.
Anyway, it won't be HS2 Ltd specifying the services, it will be the DfT along with the winner of the WCP franchise.

 

[HSTEd]

Maglev is much more expensive and the trains cannot run on the existing network. It is worth the small cost difference between building a 125mph railway and 250mph (about 10-15%). At best HS2 using Maglex would cost 50% more. The Tokyo - Nagoya will travel at a maximium speed of 314mph but use 4-5 times as much energy. The Shanghai maglev operates at conventional speeds because it is not cost effective to run at its full speed.

The energy costs of running a train are fairly minor though.
The Shanghai maglev is an incredibly short route, where increasing the speed would make almost no difference to journey time.

Acceleration would still leave normal trains in the dust even if it was limited to 'only' the levels attainable by tube stock, just continuing to 500km/h.

As to the 'lack of direct trains' argument, does it really matter if Scotland passengers have to change trains at Wigan if you can have a train from London reach Wigan in ~40 minutes?

The argument that direct trains are worth such an enormous time saving is absurd.
Never mind the journey times to most destinations would be so short that an Metropolitan line layout could be used for Birmingham services without passenger comfort difficulties.
Old Oak Common to Birmingham airport would take you less than 25 minutes for gods sake. On the tube that gets you from Euston to Tooting Bec.
A 400m S8 formation could load 3000+ people, and whilst it has no nosecones those only extend 30 metres, it still has a capacity of at least 2750 or more.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Just found this picture whilst trawking the web at half past 2! https://www.siemens.com/press/en/pr...bility/2018-06-innotrans/im2018060517moen.htm

The Velaro Novo, could Siemens offer this for HS2?

 

[33Hz]

Read all about it here:
https://issuu.com/railmedia/docs/tre-october-2018/10

A significant improvement in energy use over other European high speed stock.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

We can all dream.
Just think how many DfT ironing boards you could get into a 28.75m car length.
As these things will have to negotiate the existing WCML north of Lichfield, I doubt that the bodyshell is going to be the one in the promo.
https://new.siemens.com/global/en/p...h-speed-and-intercity-trains/velaro-novo.html

The Velaro Novo’s lightweight body shell is based on the empty tube concept, meaning that there are no permanent installations inside the car and the interior can be furnished according to customer wishes and altered whenever requirements change. The cars have no underseat containers or electrical cabinets in their interior, and their length was enlarged to 28.75 m. Passengers can enjoy the maximum available space.

 

[LOL The Irony]

Just think how many DfT ironing boards you could get into a 28.75m car length.

I can already see grayling foaming at the mouth, rubbing his hands...

 

[hwl]

I can already see grayling foaming at the mouth, rubbing his hands...

Shame the tender specifies 25.00m for intermediate cars and a ~2m Pinocchio allowance for tapered nose cone on the driving cars.

 

[rebmcr]

these things will have to negotiate the existing WCML

The classic-compatible fleet would, but the captive fleet won't have to.

 

[hwl]

The classic-compatible fleet would, but the captive fleet won't have to.

The captive fleet would be procured after the Velaro Novo has been replaced with a new generation product based on current product life spans.

 

[rebmcr]

The captive fleet would be procured after the Velaro Novo has been replaced with a new generation product based on current product life spans.

They plan to run Phase 1 with only classics?

 

[The Planner]

Yes. I don't think they will bother with captives at all.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

They plan to run Phase 1 with only classics?

They decided that before opening the procurement process, because most of the services will have to use existing lines.
Phase 2 might have some dedicated sets but procurement for that is a decade away.
Phase 1 has to get built and operational first.