HS4. Will the Highspeed network expand further?

[GrimsbyPacer]

Assuming that HS2 is built fully via Crewe and Toton/Meadowhall, and 'HS3' is made and both are huge successes despite the problems HS2 has. Where would/should HS4 and HS5 run from if motorway style expansion schemes happen?
Or would no more new High Speed routes be ever built?

 

[MidlandMainlie]

Assuming that HS2 is built fully via Crewe and Toton/Meadowhall, and 'HS3' is made and both are huge successes despite the problems HS2 has. Where would/should HS4 and HS5 run from if motorway style expansion schemes happen?
Or would no more new High Speed routes be ever built?

Assuming any extension to Scotland is labeled HS2 Phase 3 then HS4 should IMO be from Paddington to Bristol than splitting with a new Severn crossing to South Wales and a branch to the South West using upgraded lines/sections of new build like a Dawlish cutoff.

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Assuming any extension to Scotland is labeled HS2 Phase 3 then HS4 should IMO be from Paddington to Bristol than splitting with a new Severn crossing to South Wales and a branch to the South West using upgraded lines/sections of new build like a Dawlish cutoff.

Okay, I guessed the Southwest and South Wales would be next. But I was unsure if it would go from Birmingham or London Euston.
So HS4 like HS3 would mainly be an upgrade to a current mainline.

 

[NotATrainspott]

Okay, I guessed the Southwest and South Wales would be next. But I was unsure if it would go from Birmingham or London Euston.
So HS4 like HS3 would mainly be an upgrade to a current mainline.

Any line from London would require another Zone 1 terminus of some description, so there would be an enormous amount of expenditure that really might not be justified there if Paddington and the GWML are capable of dealing with reasonably high speed services. A line from Birmingham would cost less and would do more good, because the existing line is less than ideal, while any extensions beyond Bristol could then serve both the London and Cross-Country services.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Looking into the RailUK crystal balls that are issued to especially favoured members, can these recipiants give a starting date for HS4, as being born in 1945, I am unlikely to see the start of HS2...

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Looking into the RailUK crystal balls that are issued to especially favoured members, can these recipiants give a starting date for HS4, as being born in 1945, I am unlikely to see the start of HS2...

I am assuming HS4 will pop up the year before a 2019 election as a vote winning tactic for getting lots of areas voting for whichever party needs them. It will probably start in 2030-5 if it happens??
HS2 might be started earlier than planned according to some reports.

 

[Ironside]

Assuming that HS2 is built fully via Crewe and Toton/Meadowhall, and 'HS3' is made and both are huge successes despite the problems HS2 has. Where would/should HS4 and HS5 run from if motorway style expansion schemes happen?
Or would no more new High Speed routes be ever built?

I would extend hs2 to edinburgh and Glasgow from Manchester and Leeds via Newcastle. Hs4 London to Swansea via Bristol and Cardiff (with exits off/on the track to Heathrow, Reading, and Newport). A branch from Bristol to Exeter, Plymouth, St Austell, Truro. Another line from London to Exeter via Southampton and an exit for Basingstoke. And HS3 should be Liverpool to Hull.

 

[Class 170101]

A High Speed Line should be built from Plymouth to Birmingham (Interchange) via Exeter and Bristol with a fast link between Bristol and Old Oak Common.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Looking into the RailUK crystal balls that are issued to especially favoured members, can these recipiants give a starting date for HS4, as being born in 1945, I am unlikely to see the start of HS2...

I was born in 1957 and I may struggle!

 

[Altnabreac]

I think we'll see incremental extensions of HS network. Rather than "HS4".

If we assume the currently planned lines are:
HS2 Phase 1 London - Birmingham
Edinburgh - Glasgow HSR
HS2 Phase 2 Birmingham - Leeds / Manchester
HS3 Manchester - Leeds

Then we have extensions of HS2/3
HS2 Phase 3 to Scotland
HS2 Leeds - Newcastle (if not included in Scottish line)
HS2/3 Liverpool City Centre link

I reckon there'd then be a decent case for a line following the M42 from Birmingham Inerchange to Worcester to bypass Birmingham. You could speed up and increase capacity on Bristol services without needing a full new line all the way to Bristol.

 

[Haydn1971]

I'd imagine a HS2 Phase 3 to Scotland to link with an independent HS line between Glasgow and Edinburgh.

I'd imagine HS3 Phase 1 as being a core lower speed but HS2 gauge line between Warrington and York, with a chord heading south to Sheffield and using existing improved lines as classic compatibles to Liverpool, Hull and ECML destinations North of York

If there is a HS4 - I'd imagine a core line to Cardiff via Bristol as full speed HSR, with slower spur down towards the West Country and Swansea, using as much existing infrastructure as possible.

 

[HSTEd]

Really the line that should be next on the list for relief is in the south east.

If you put a London-Brighton Line with a single intermediate stop at Gatwick you could probably make a turn and run west along the coast for a long way and still beat the more 'direct' trains in travel time terms.

Might even be able to reach Weymouth potentially.

 

[Muzer]

I'm assuming you mean a high speed line between Brighton and Weymouth (or at least Southampton)? You couldn't possibly beat London to Southampton times on the West Coastway... historically via London on the conventional lines has actually beaten the West Coastway for journeys like Southampton to Brighton

 

[HSTEd]

Indeed, a high speed line between London-Brighton-Southampton-Bournemouth-Weymouth.

You would probably take over (partially) the West Coastway though and extend the Brighton fast-runners (as opposed to Southampton fast runners) through to Havant or somewhere.

The New Forest is annoyingly in the way - though there is always the engineering option of dropping the line into an immersed tube tunnel under the Solent to go around it.

 

[NSEFAN]

I'm sure Portsmouth would argue it deserves a high speed line more than its neighbours in Southampton and Brighton.

 

[HSTEd]

Well if you can find me a station location in Portsmouth then they can also take part. As far as I can see the only option is a very expensive box though.

 

[Rapidash]

It would be nice if a HS line was to be sent down this way, but I suspect it would be nigh on impossible, considering how hard councils already have to be when dealing with landowners.

Lets face it, Charles isn't going to be wanting something like that near his stuff in Cornwall :P.

Ideally there'd be new Hub Stations for the major conurbations, which integrate all forms of public transport for that area. I think I'll wait to see if leccyfication can happen down here first, before I dare contemplate an advance into the 21st century

 

[GrimsbyPacer]

Which of the following should happen soonest?
1, London to Bristol then Swansea or Devon.
2, Same but from Birmingham instead of London.
3, London to Brighton then Southampton.
4, Norwich to Liverpool via Sheffield.
5, Edinburgh to Glasgow.
6, A Belfast link via an undersea tunnel.
7, London bypass between HS1 & HS2.
8, An upgrade to a current mainline.

 

[HowardGWR]

Which of the following would be best?
1, London to Bristol then Swansea or Devon.
2, Same but from Birmingham instead of London.
3, London to Brighton then Southampton.
4, Norwich to Liverpool via Sheffield.
5, Edinburgh to Glasgow.
6, A Belfast link via an undersea tunnel.
7, Lonfon bypass between HS1 & HS2.
8, An upgrade to a current mainline.

Perhaps 'soonest' rather than 'best' would have been better; they are all 'good'.

I argue for 2, then 3, then 4. The 2 (Brum to Bristol) must terminate in Bristol, not Stoke Gifford. The latter has been dubbed Parkway, which reminds me of the old GWR method of indicating that the station is nowhere where people need to be (they would have called Parkway 'Bristol Road').

Regarding 1, it's not needed for yonks.

 

[deltic]

Which of the following would be best?
1, London to Bristol then Swansea or Devon.
2, Same but from Birmingham instead of London.
3, London to Brighton then Southampton.
4, Norwich to Liverpool via Sheffield.
5, Edinburgh to Glasgow.
6, A Belfast link via an undersea tunnel.
7, Lonfon bypass between HS1 & HS2.
8, An upgrade to a current mainline.

1 would likely to be next -
2 not needed use HS2 to OOC and change
3 distance too short
4 no business case
5 only worth while if HS2 extended to Scotland for which there is no business case and the environmental difficulties are huge - may happen though as price of SNP support to next UK government
6 never happen - unless required to keep Ulster parties on side in a coalition after next election
7 never happen as long as we remain outside Schengen agreement - if we ever sign up its a no brainer
8 given problems with eastern branch of HS2 a possible alterative would be for a high speed Midland route to Leeds via Leicester

 

[plastictaffy]

With all the shouting going on about "rare butterflies" and the like from the NIMBY's - incidentally, the very same NIMBY's that will be the sort of people who use public transport to commute into the city (and will make a fortune when Nitwit Rail buy their four bed semi's), what makes you think that any of us will see HS2??

All of us, including our grandchildren and their grandchildren will be paying for it, yet it almost certain that we mere mortals won't be able to afford a seat on it!!

Is HS2 needed?? Is there another option??

 

[HSTEd]

London-Brighton-Southampton is hardly too short - indeed it comes out comparable to HS2-1's length.
And the routes south of London desperately need new capacity, and noone has yet given me a feasible way to provide that without a new line. And in the era of fast accelerating EMUs high speed operation is easier than not really.

Ashford to Ebbsfleet is hardly considered to short and that is half the distance between London and Brighton alone.

 

[plastictaffy]

The New Forest is annoyingly in the way - though there is always the engineering option of dropping the line into an immersed tube tunnel under the Solent to go around it.

Just rip up the DC rail, overhead the lot and tidy it up a bit, then invite Branson to rip off the punters to travel in some plastic "train" that smells odd.

 

[Haydn1971]

To be fair, Brighton to Southampton is about as far as Heathrow to Southampton, the latter wouldn't have to go through an AONB either.

I'm not entirely convinced a London-Gatwick-Brighton or a London-Guildford-Southampton line would generate the passenger numbers for a HS2 style line, the current routes are very busy but have many more station sources/sinks

 

[edwin_m]

The distances south of London are that much shorter and the population density that much higher than any new route would be a high-density interurban rather than a high speed as such. If you ignore Eurostar, which has no counterpart anywhere else, that is effectively what HS1 does. The dividing line gets very fuzzy between a high speed line and, say, a London-Brighton upgrade with a tunnel under Croydon.

 

[HSTEd]

You could put a station every twenty miles and still average a higher speed than the maximum on classic lines. Imagine if you will 400m Cl395 type jobs or similar speed double deck EMUs with evenn larger capacity.

A Brighton-Southampton route would be better able to pick up traffic from coastal areas with higher population densities and worse connections.

 

[NotATrainspott]

London to Brighton would be served best by a new express tunnel to be used by normal 110mph commuter stock from the Zone 1 terminus out to Gatwick. There's no real need to go much faster given that the longest possible journey in that direction is around 50 miles. This option becomes particularly likely if Gatwick is chosen for expansion, given that a very fast rail link to Zone 1 would be more than ideal for the airport to succeed.

 

[HSTEd]

A Class 395 would be able to do a 50 mile (80km) journey in something like 26 minutes, which is an average speed of 115mph stop-to-stop.
With 110mph stock you would be luck to get above 100mph.
(Even with an intermediate stop at Gatwick you would still manage the journey in less than 35 minutes, which I imagine would beat the classic train by a significant margin.)

Additionally you would never be able to justify sufficient traffic for a tunnel just on the basis of Gatwick and Brighton, its just mind-numbingly expensive for such a minor flow.
A modern line would have the capacity of something like 3 classic lines.

If you tie the BML, the SWML and bits of other routes in that area together you can justify the construction cost.

It also creates a Super-Coastway and ties the coastal regions closer together without having to travel in and out of London again.
As to a direct route to Southampton, you would likely have to take a dog leg to stay west of the M3 to stay out of the South Downs National Park, which would start to rob that distance advantage in construction cost terms.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes I was thinking of Class 395 as the closest to the type of train that would be used on a Southern high speed line. Station spacings are fairly similar to those on HS1. Interesting to see if Davies recommends something like this if he goes for Gatwick, though personally I think a choice of Heathrow is much more likely.

 

[higthomas]

I would have thought what they would go for would be a tunnel south from London splitting somewhere near Epsom with branches for the SWML, BML and Guidfod and Portsmouth meeting those lines at Brookwood, Salfords and Jacobswell respectively.

Although I doubt it will ever happen though. Once they build crossrail 2 that will sort out the SWML problems for quite a while.