London etc to - Leeds via HS2 West

[21C101]

HS2 Journey time London to Manchester Picc is 1h11.

Journey time from Manchester Picc to Leeds in Government report this week 33 minutes.

If there was a triangle at Piccadilly (ie a Piccadilly avoiding spur) the following journeys and times would be possible.

London, Old Oak Common, Birmingham International, Manchester Airport, Huddersfield, Leeds

(Exeter, Bristol), Birmingham Curzon St, Manchester Airport, Huddersfield, Leeds, York, Newcastle.

Estimated journey times based on HS2/NPR times and existing times beyond.

London to Leeds in 1h 40 Minutes.

London to Huddersfield in ~1h 25 mins

Huddersfield to Manchester Airport in 25 mins.

Birmingham Curzon St to Leeds in 1h 14 mins.

Btrmingham Curzon St to York in 1h 36 mins

Birmingham Curzon St to Newcastle in 2h 33 mins.

If a chord was built to the classic line at Water Orton:

Leeds to Bristol Temple Meads via Bhm New St in 2h 39 mins

Newcastle to Bristol Temple Meads in 3h 36 mins

Leeds to Exeter St Davids in 3h 38 mins.

Seems that HM Government have missed a trick here?

 

[tomuk]

Seems that HM Government have missed a trick here?

IRP Paragraph 3.109

MRH will focus on enabling improved services to
Birmingham Moor Street, which is next to the HS2
terminus at Curzon Street. This could see more trains per
hour passing through Moor Street with more local and
long-distance services into Moor Street. The Rail Hub
could enable improved services to Hereford, Bristol and
Cardiff, plus the transfer of commuter services on the
Birmingham ‘Camp Hill’ line from Kings Norton.

Bullet point at bottom of same page

• help improve connectivity and increase capacity by creating new opportunities for services into Birmingham from the South West, and interchange with HS2 at Curzon Street. This would not be possible with existing plans;

 

[Nottingham59]

London to Leeds in 1h 40 Minutes.

Or just timetable diagrams for London - Manchester (reverse) - Leeds in 1h 45m or so. There are lots of possibilities with a bit of thought around where trains go next. Liverpool - Birmingham - Nottingham would take about 1h 30m, compared to 3 hours today. I'm surprised the government aren't promoting those sort of journey time savings in the IRD.

 

[MattRat]

I'm sure I created a thread similar to this at one point (or possibly went off topic). I seem to remember someone replying to me saying Leeds via the Western leg would be slower than current services or those via the MML from EMP.

 

[21C101]

I'm sure I created a thread similar to this at one point (or possibly went off topic). I seem to remember someone replying to me saying Leeds via the Western leg would be slower than current services or those via the MML from EMP.

Possibly before the final announcement when it seemed like Clayton to Leeds was still on from leaks at the time.

HS2 journey planner time from Curzon St to Picc is 41 minutes and the government stating 33 mins for Picc to Leeds in the report, they state 89 minutes for Birmingham Leeds via NPR, so they allow 15 minutes dwell time at Picc.

A triangle south of Piccadilly allowing trains to bypass it would, on that measure allow considerable time gain, with a call still at Manchester Airport.

(in the same way as London to Manchester trains will call at Birmingham International HS2 but not reverse in and out of Curzon St).

Similarly, uing the journey planner time of 1h 11m to Manchester and govt time of 33 mins to Leeds gives you 1h 40 from London to Leeds calling at Old Oak, Birmingham Intl, Manchester Airport and Huddersfield (Iv'e knocked 2 minutes of both segments due to my proposed Picc avoiding line).

Once you add in a 5 minute call and reversal at Picc you are up to 1h 49 mins which is only four minutes faster than the report claims the journey from KX via ECML will be.

That said, even this (extending the HS2 London to Man Picc trains to Leeds with a reversal) would make more sense than trying to run 2 fast Kings Cross to Leeds services as well as the current "semifasts" calling at Peterborough, Newark, Retford etc; as paths gained on an ECML upgrade can be used for regular hourly services to places like Hull, with all Leeds services calling at all of Stevenage, Peterbro, Grantfam, Newark, Retford, Donny and Wakefield, giving a full clockface half hourly service.

 

[Purple Orange]

HS2 journey planner time from Curzon St to Picc is 41 minutes and the government stating 33 mins for Picc to Leeds in the report, they state 89 minutes for Birmingham Leeds via NPR, so they allow 15 minutes dwell time at Picc.

The stated journey times between Birmingham & Manchester is 41-51 minutes, with the 10 min difference a result of making a stop at Crewe. The Birmingham-Leeds times are stared at 89 minutes, which means it’ll be 5 min dwell based on a line stopping at Crewe.

 

[21C101]

The stated journey times between Birmingham & Manchester is 41-51 minutes, with the 10 min difference a result of making a stop at Crewe. The Birmingham-Leeds times are stared at 89 minutes, which means it’ll be 5 min dwell based on a line stopping at Crewe

Thanks, I was going by the HS2 journey planner time of 41 minutes.

Thats a long time penalty for a stop at Crewe, I wonder how many trains will actually do that.

Nonetheless it is still on the government timings 4 minutes faster from Euston to Leeds with a 5 minute reversal at Piccadilly (if Crewe is omitted), than the post upgrade ECML timings from Kings Cross, so it would seem to sensible to use the paths gained by the ECML upgrade for other things rather than fast trains to Kings Cross.

With a Piccadilly avoiding line you are looking at 1h 40m from Euston to Leeds, only 19 munutes slower than if HS2 East had been built in full.

 

[30907]

I would support a triangular junction at Manchester, for the reasons given. It also makes sense to use the new-build route under the Pennines to maximum capacity, and therefore run Leeds-London as well as -Birmingham that way.

The follow-up question (and the one the Govt is going to "study") is how to achieve the promised time-savings and sufficient capacity in Yorkshire. I am struggling to see how 33min is achievable unless you skip Huddersfield, which doesn't seem very sensible.

1. I assume Marsden-Thornhill LNW Jn will be the existing route upgraded, with an amended version of the currently planned rebuild of Huddersfield, but I can't see more than 2-3 minutes saving on that section.

2. Thence to Leeds is another 10 minutes or so, with stopping services to cater for, and this is where I see the problems arising, both with capacity (I've made it worse, see above!) and with shaving more than an odd minute off the time.

3. Leeds itself will need considerable work - I assume at least 2, probably 4 full-length platforms, on the south side of the existing station. My suggestion would be to run directly into these from the Farnley/Wortley area (using the disused LNW trackbed but not the old viaduct), which would save a minute or so on the Whitehall Jn route (even under clear signals, if such exist!).

4. The only alternatives East of Thornhill would be a new-build via Normanton, which would be roughly twice the distance (so you would be hard put to it to save time), or a direct line with a long tunnel in the Morley area. Both would solve the capacity problem but at great expense.

 

[37424]

I would support a triangular junction at Manchester, for the reasons given. It also makes sense to use the new-build route under the Pennines to maximum capacity, and therefore run Leeds-London as well as -Birmingham that way.

The follow-up question (and the one the Govt is going to "study") is how to achieve the promised time-savings and sufficient capacity in Yorkshire. I am struggling to see how 33min is achievable unless you skip Huddersfield, which doesn't seem very sensible.

1. I assume Marsden-Thornhill LNW Jn will be the existing route upgraded, with an amended version of the currently planned rebuild of Huddersfield, but I can't see more than 2-3 minutes saving on that section.

2. Thence to Leeds is another 10 minutes or so, with stopping services to cater for, and this is where I see the problems arising, both with capacity (I've made it worse, see above!) and with shaving more than an odd minute off the time.

3. Leeds itself will need considerable work - I assume at least 2, probably 4 full-length platforms, on the south side of the existing station. My suggestion would be to run directly into these from the Farnley/Wortley area (using the disused LNW trackbed but not the old viaduct), which would save a minute or so on the Whitehall Jn route (even under clear signals, if such exist!).

4. The only alternatives East of Thornhill would be a new-build via Normanton, which would be roughly twice the distance (so you would be hard put to it to save time), or a direct line with a long tunnel in the Morley area. Both would solve the capacity problem but at great expense.

And isnt that going to be the crux of the matter by not building a completely new line isnt capacity going to be substancially compromised particularly between Leeds and Ravensthorpe, likely preluding a London service to Leeds via Manchester, as for upgrading between Ravensthorpe and Leeds not only is there the tunnel but also at least 3 viaducts that I can think of so that's going to be massively expensive.

 

[matacaster]

And isnt that going to be the crux of the matter by not building a completely new line isnt capacity going to be substancially compromised particularly between Leeds and Ravensthorpe, likely preluding a London service to Leeds via Manchester, as for upgrading between Ravensthorpe and Leeds not only is there the tunnel but also at least 3 viaducts that I can think of so that's going to be massively expensive.

One wonders if the quick time quoted is for some headline trains via batley, with others being sent via normanton.

Best idea would be a new Y-shaped route from Heaton lodge to Leeds (some tunnelling / bridges, then rejoining straight part of Leeds new line, but not using wiggly viaduct into Leeds. The other leg would be ti to bfd interchange, which would allow fast Bradford to huddersfield

 

[snowball]

With a Piccadilly avoiding line you are looking at 1h 40m from Euston to Leeds, only 19 munutes slower than if HS2 East had been built in full.

I don't think there will be a Piccadilly avoiding line as it would require extremely expensive tunnelled junctions at the south end at least (and maybe the east end too).

 

[MattRat]

I don't think there will be a Piccadilly avoiding line as it would require extremely expensive tunnelled junctions at the south end at least (and maybe the east end too).

So Leeds passengers have to what, sit on a train for 10 minutes in a station they aren't going to? I hope they at least get a free drink.....

 

[tomuk]

So Leeds passengers have to what, sit on a train for 10 minutes in a station they aren't going to? I hope they at least get a free drink.....

It's a 5 minutes stop not 10 based on comparing the Liverpool - Manchester, Manchester - Leeds and Liverpool-Leeds times in the report.

 

[Purple Orange]

It's a 5 minutes stop not 10 based on comparing the Liverpool - Manchester, Manchester - Leeds and Liverpool-Leeds times in the report.

It is definitely 5 mins, although confusion about 10 mins was brought about through the Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds times which the report is inconsistent about. Birmingham-Manchester is stated at 41-51 mins in some places and 41 in others, while Leeds-Manchester is 33 mins. Leeds-Birmingham is stated at 79-89 mins in some sections and 89 in others, so depending on what numbers you read, you could calculate a 10 min dwell, despite it really being 5.

 

[MattRat]

It is definitely 5 mins, although confusion about 10 mins was brought about through the Birmingham-Manchester-Leeds times which the report is inconsistent about. Birmingham-Manchester is stated at 41-51 mins in some places and 41 in others, while Leeds-Manchester is 33 mins. Leeds-Birmingham is stated at 79-89 mins in some sections and 89 in others, so depending on what numbers you read, you could calculate a 10 min dwell, despite it really being 5.

Or the government could change it to 10. Wouldn't be surprised.

 

[30907]

One wonders if the quick time quoted is for some headline trains via batley, with others being sent via normanton.

Unlikely unless they build a HS route that way.

Best idea would be a new Y-shaped route from Heaton lodge to Leeds (some tunnelling / bridges, then rejoining straight part of Leeds new line, but not using wiggly viaduct into Leeds.

Can't see them abandoning their nice upgrade through Mirfield, so it will need to start at the Thornhill end, sorry.

The other leg would be ti to bfd interchange, which would allow fast Bradford to huddersfield

See comments on the Bradford IRP thread - impossible to justify financially

 

[Glenn1969]

Unlikely unless they build a HS route that way.

Can't see them abandoning their nice upgrade through Mirfield, so it will need to start at the Thornhill end, sorry.

See comments on the Bradford IRP thread - impossible to justify financially

Not impossible unless you're trying to do it on the cheap which I think they are. See my posts previously about the whole of Yorkshire needing to be improved. If they are serious about net zero they need to do it

 

[MattRat]

Not impossible unless you're trying to do it on the cheap which I think they are. See my posts previously about the whole of Yorkshire needing to be improved. If they are serious about net zero they need to do it

It's austerity all over again. It's actually financially better to invest than to try and save a few pennies.