Possible HS2 Euston station de-scoping

[ABB125]

Letter in last month's Modern Railways from the relevant expert explained it; basically the number of West Coast Voyagers.

That basically sets the Euston > Chester > Euston round trip time at 5 hours (to not use too many sets) and the relative fixation of the Up and Down Chester paths. Those in turn fall on the opposite half hour to the Manchester-Crewe-Euston service (to give Crewe-Euston half-hourly), and thus the rest of the 20 minute pattern.

And there is a gap in Euston departures from xx33 to xx40 that corresponds to the Up Chester arrival each hour, to give it the most flexibility in which platform at Euston it can arrive in to make its return working at xx10.

Thanks

 

[100andthirty]

I agree with this. I really hope they've modelled passenger flow at Old Oak Common carefully. It would be a shame if the limiting factor on HS2 turned out to be OOC loading and unloading times.

Pedantically, each coach on a 400 m train will take no longer for boarding and alighting than on a 200 m train. But walking to and from the coaches and thus dispersing the people might take longer depending on the station design. One ramp like at Euston today will lead to longer times for the longer trains, but if there were to be a concourse above the tracks with several ramps/escalators/stairs/lifts then the extra time will be reduced. An example of the latter can be seen in the proposals for the remodelled East Croydon station.

 

[BayPaul]

Would probably be easier and less disruptive to divert to Curzon Street and send passengers forward on a waiting Euston service there without impacting a through dwell time.

Now that does sound very practical

Pedantically, each coach on a 400 m train will take no longer for boarding and alighting than on a 200 m train. But walking to and from the coaches and thus dispersing the people might take longer depending on the station design. One ramp like at Euston today will lead to longer times for the longer trains, but if there were to be a concourse above the tracks with several ramps/escalators/stairs/lifts then the extra time will be reduced. An example of the latter can be seen in the proposals for the remodelled East Croydon station.

OOC plans do show escalators at two points on the platform, leading to a central concourse, meaning the escalators are positioned roughly at quarter points, so noone should need to walk more than 100m from the train door to the escalator.

 

[quantinghome]

Things like platform width, multiple platform entry/exits and how passengers are managed will help.

E.g. if you're in Coach 12, use entrance B and wait in the Purple Zone (or whatever).

Assuming tickets are all on mobile phones it could probably tell you where to stand within the nearest 1-2 metres.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Assuming tickets are all on mobile phones it could probably tell you where to stand within the nearest 1-2 metres.

Even if they're not it should not be difficult to provide that information on platform displays.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Letter in last month's Modern Railways from the relevant expert explained it; basically the number of West Coast Voyagers.
That basically sets the Euston > Chester > Euston round trip time at 5 hours (to not use too many sets) and the relative fixation of the Up and Down Chester paths. Those in turn fall on the opposite half hour to the Manchester-Crewe-Euston service (to give Crewe-Euston half-hourly), and thus the rest of the 20 minute pattern.
And there is a gap in Euston departures from xx33 to xx40 that corresponds to the Up Chester arrival each hour, to give it the most flexibility in which platform at Euston it can arrive in to make its return working at xx10.

Which makes it all the more important that the new 805s can meet the current Voyager running times Euston to/from Chester, running at 110mph max!
Sorry to go off topic.

 

[The Planner]

Which makes it all the more important that the new 805s can meet the current Voyager running times Euston to/from Chester, running at 110mph max!
Sorry to go off topic.

Not necessarily, the WCML is due a recast prior to HS2 anyway.

 

[Ianno87]

Which makes it all the more important that the new 805s can meet the current Voyager running times Euston to/from Chester, running at 110mph max!
Sorry to go off topic.

Not necessarily, the WCML is due a recast prior to HS2 anyway.

And if there are more 805s than 221s, the constraint is removed.

 

[Nottingham59]

OOC dwells will be 2 minutes

Yes, it would need to be about that, to meet the proposed schedule.

The passenger flow modelling predicts that about half of all HS2 passengers to London will be getting on or off at OOC. Are they absolutely sure that half the passengers on an HS2 train will all be able to get off in 120 seconds? Especially when some of them are going to be families with luggage and baby buggies trying to get to Heathrow. And others are tourists heading to Euston who have already got their cases down from the overhead racks and block the gangways before the train has even got to Old Oak ......

 

[MarkyT]

Would probably be easier and less disruptive to divert to Curzon Street and send passengers forward on a waiting Euston service there without impacting a through dwell time.

Now that does sound very practical

Possibly not from a customer care perspective though. As most people heading to London will not be going specifically to the immediate walking distance environs of Euston and be interchanging to bus/tube/taxi (or other heavy rail at nearby Kings Cross/St Pancras) to go on to somewhere else within London, the South East, or the Continent instead, then an interchange at OOC onto the Lizzie is a very good second best option if short turn-round is implemented tactically for a particular train to get back on diagram, rather than a wholesale transfer of passengers to an already possibly very full next departure from Curzon Street.

 

[BayPaul]

Possibly not from a customer care perspective though. As most people heading to London will not be going specifically to the immediate walking distance environs of Euston and be interchanging to bus/tube/taxi (or other heavy rail at nearby Kings Cross/St Pancras) to go on to somewhere else within London, the South East, or the Continent instead, then an interchange at OOC onto the Lizzie is a very good second best option if short turn-round is implemented tactically for a particular train to get back on diagram, rather than a wholesale transfer of passengers to an already possibly very full next departure from Curzon Street.

OOC is certainly better where possible, but Curzon Street wouldn't be a bad shout for a very delayed train, if sending it south would cause more passenger disruption than it saved

 

[MarkyT]

OOC is certainly better where possible, but Curzon Street wouldn't be a bad shout for a very delayed train, if sending it south would cause more passenger disruption than it saved

Would agree with that. As I understand it use of Birmingham Interchange would be practically impossible as currently conceived. I suppose if there was another grade-separated junction at its south end, heading for (say) an additional south west branch, then a reversing siding facility might be incorporated for use in emergencies.

 

[Ianno87]

Possibly not from a customer care perspective though. As most people heading to London will not be going specifically to the immediate walking distance environs of Euston and be interchanging to bus/tube/taxi (or other heavy rail at nearby Kings Cross/St Pancras) to go on to somewhere else within London, the South East, or the Continent instead, then an interchange at OOC onto the Lizzie is a very good second best option if short turn-round is implemented tactically for a particular train to get back on diagram, rather than a wholesale transfer of passengers to an already possibly very full next departure from Curzon Street.

OOC is certainly better where possible, but Curzon Street wouldn't be a bad shout for a very delayed train, if sending it south would cause more passenger disruption than it saved

Would agree with that. As I understand it use of Birmingham Interchange would be practically impossible as currently conceived. I suppose if there was another grade-separated junction at its south end, heading for (say) an additional south west branch, then a reversing siding facility might be incorporated for use in emergencies.

I'd suggest Old Oak for a bit late (i.e. a PPM failure), Curzon Street for severely late (30 mins or more)

 

[Horizon22]

Yes, it would need to be about that, to meet the proposed schedule.

The passenger flow modelling predicts that about half of all HS2 passengers to London will be getting on or off at OOC. Are they absolutely sure that half the passengers on an HS2 train will all be able to get off in 120 seconds? Especially when some of them are going to be families with luggage and baby buggies trying to get to Heathrow. And others are tourists heading to Euston who have already got their cases down from the overhead racks and block the gangways before the train has even got to Old Oak ......

I'm sure with adequate pre-announcements, wide doors etc. 2 mins should be feasible. It will need to be marshalled effectively, but I'm sure it can be done.

 

[CW2]

Yes, it would need to be about that, to meet the proposed schedule.

The passenger flow modelling predicts that about half of all HS2 passengers to London will be getting on or off at OOC. Are they absolutely sure that half the passengers on an HS2 train will all be able to get off in 120 seconds? Especially when some of them are going to be families with luggage and baby buggies trying to get to Heathrow. And others are tourists heading to Euston who have already got their cases down from the overhead racks and block the gangways before the train has even got to Old Oak ......

I recall the modelling suggested a 1/3 OOC 2/3 Euston split, although I believe it may well be asymmetrical. So when travelling toward my theoretical City office in the morning I would alight at OOC for Crossrail, wherea in the evening I would travel to Euston to join my homeward train from there.

 

[Ianno87]

I recall the modelling suggested a 1/3 OOC 2/3 Euston split, although I believe it may well be asymmetrical. So when travelling toward my theoretical City office in the morning I would alight at OOC for Crossrail, wherea in the evening I would travel to Euston to join my homeward train from there.

With allocated seating, "get on at Euston to get a seat" may not apply, but there are still reasons why you may anyway, such as being settled on a warm train sooner, preferred luggage space, etc.

 

[CW2]

With allocated seating, "get on at Euston to get a seat" may not apply, but there are still reasons why you may anyway, such as being settled on a warm train sooner, preferred luggage space, etc.

Precisely - if I'm having to wait 10 minutes or so for my train to depart, I'd prefer to do that sitting on the train at Euston rather than standing on the platform at OOC.

 

[quantinghome]

I'd suggest Old Oak for a bit late (i.e. a PPM failure), Curzon Street for severely late (30 mins or more)

That seems rather drastic. These sorts of delays will only be likely for the long distance trains which should have more generous turnaround times at Euston. If a train is this late, surely there is sufficient slack in the turnarounds and flexibility in the diagramming to allow another train to be prepared more quickly and take its outbound slot?

 

[Ianno87]

That seems rather drastic. These sorts of delays will only be likely for the long distance trains which should have more generous turnaround times at Euston. If a train is this late, surely there is sufficient slack in the turnarounds and flexibility in the diagramming to allow another train to be prepared more quickly and take its outbound slot?

Guess it depends on how easy it is to "prepare another train", e.g. a Captive train could not be sent on a non-Captive service, Newcastle drivers may not be able to go to Liverpool etc.

I guess the concept of HS2 is minimising the instances of trains arriving late to warrant such an intervention in the first place.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, it would need to be about that, to meet the proposed schedule.

The passenger flow modelling predicts that about half of all HS2 passengers to London will be getting on or off at OOC. Are they absolutely sure that half the passengers on an HS2 train will all be able to get off in 120 seconds? Especially when some of them are going to be families with luggage and baby buggies trying to get to Heathrow. And others are tourists heading to Euston who have already got their cases down from the overhead racks and block the gangways before the train has even got to Old Oak ......

I'm sure with adequate pre-announcements, wide doors etc. 2 mins should be feasible. It will need to be marshalled effectively, but I'm sure it can be done.

Easily. Most Avanti dwells are 2 minutes now and they deal with boarders and alighters.

 

[MarkyT]

Guess it depends on how easy it is to "prepare another train", e.g. a Captive train could not be sent on a non-Captive service, Newcastle drivers may not be able to go to Liverpool etc.

I guess the concept of HS2 is minimising the instances of trains arriving late to warrant such an intervention in the first place.

And of course, by then some services may be International, crossing into an independent Scotland and possibly the EU, and maybe requiring special facilities onboard for customs and immigration, unless an 'all out for an hour while we confiscate your ham sandwiches in the freezing rain at Gretna Green' arrangement is instigated.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd suggest Old Oak for a bit late (i.e. a PPM failure), Curzon Street for severely late (30 mins or more)

I'd suggest if a minor delay (say 10-15 minutes) isn't able to be accommodated running all the way to Euston, something needs a serious rethink. HS2 isn't self-contained, it'll import delays from all over the place and needs to be resilient enough to handle them. We're building a new railway for billions of pounds, it needs to be built with adequate resilience. Resilience isn't sexy, but it's needed.

 

[Ianno87]

I'd suggest if a minor delay (say 10-15 minutes) isn't able to be accommodated running all the way to Euston, something needs a serious rethink. HS2 isn't self-contained, it'll import delays from all over the place and needs to be resilient enough to handle them. We're building a new railway for billions of pounds, it needs to be built with adequate resilience. Resilience isn't sexy, but it's needed.

I agree - by "PPM failure", I meant up to something around the 15 minute or range should indeed be tolerable into Euston without major knock-on delays.

 

[Bald Rick]

With 20 minute turnrounds for most services, and longer for the Scottish trains, on 18 tph you are pretty much full at Euston. Allowing for 400m long trains to clear the station throat, there is actually very little flexibility in the timetable. The only way you could create more flexibility would be by sub-standard turnround times, which is a performance risk. There is some flexibility to swap (say) a Manchester with a Leeds path or a Birmingham with a Newcastle, but part of the attraction of such a line is having an evenly spaced regular interval timetable (like the current WCML timetable). So having Euston to Manchester services at 00 / 20 / 40 minutes past every hour is a lot better than 00 / 15 / 43, for example.

Well the business case is based on 17tph; and even if all those were delivered ...

With the Scotland and Newcastle trains on 30 min turn rounds, everything else on 20, and 5 minute platform reoccupation (easily done given the terminal layout, 60kph speed, and ATO*), you would be using 77.5% of technical platform capacity. Or in other words, you could do it off 8 platforms if it all worked perfectly.

* the linespeed on departure steps up from 60kph from the platforms and immediate throat through to 65, 70 then 100kph by Mornington St bridge, just over 1k from the buffer stops. A 400m train departing will be clear of all junctions between in and outbound lines within 90seconds of wheel roll. An arrival will have a similar time - in theory the ATO could have the train more than halfway down the platform at 60kph before putting the brake in. That would be quite a sight!

 

[CW2]

Or in other words, you could do it off 8 platforms if it all worked perfectly.

That might be the case if the station throat allowed infinite conflict free arrivals and departures from all platforms. Of course, it doesn't so you can't measure it on platform occupancy alone, as that gives a false measure.
The entire HS2 route is designed around 18 tph, so Euston needs to cater for that, regardless of the business case being for 17 tph.

Reviewing the evidence from William Barter to the National Infrastructure Commission I note that he suggests a standardised platform occupation of 25 minutes / 5 minutes reoccupation / 25 minutes / 5 minutes reoccupation i.e. 2 trains per platform face per hour, and the Scottish services dropping back a slot to give a 55 minute / 5 minute pattern.

Yes you could probably try to sweat the infrastructure harder than this, but does it make sense to design in the hardest constraint from the outset? I think not.

 

[Bald Rick]

That might be the case if the station throat allowed infinite conflict free arrivals and departures from all platforms. Of course, it doesn't so you can't measure it on platform occupancy alone, as that gives a false measure.

Well, yes, but the layout is designed such that you can timetable conflict free arrivals and departures continually. Hence the grade separation at the tunnel portal.

 

[Bevan Price]

Pedantically, each coach on a 400 m train will take no longer for boarding and alighting than on a 200 m train. But walking to and from the coaches and thus dispersing the people might take longer depending on the station design. One ramp like at Euston today will lead to longer times for the longer trains, but if there were to be a concourse above the tracks with several ramps/escalators/stairs/lifts then the extra time will be reduced. An example of the latter can be seen in the proposals for the remodelled East Croydon station.

The worst problem for boarding at places like Euston would be if they only open the platform access doors almost at the last minute. Walking 400m whilst carrying luggage would take up to 5 minutes, even for fairly fit people.

 

[Bald Rick]

The worst problem for boarding at places like Euston would be if they only open the platform access doors almost at the last minute. Walking 400m whilst carrying luggage would take up to 5 minutes, even for fairly fit people.

The concourse will be above the platforms, with multiple access points.

 

[CW2]

Well, yes, but the layout is designed such that you can timetable conflict free arrivals and departures continually. Hence the grade separation at the tunnel portal.

Except you can't do it continually regardless of the grade separation, because the platforms have to be grouped, i.e. King points , Queen points etc, fanning out. The grade separation allows movements to one side of the station conflict free with the other side, but there are still platform end conflicts to resolve - which you can only do by very careful and accurate timetabling. So if you can use the type of repeating half-hourly pattern I outlined above, you can minimise this conflict, but if you try to timetable departures at different intervals (i.e. to meet a hypothetical platform occupancy target) then it all falls to bits rather rapidly.

 

[Class 170101]

And there is a gap in Euston departures from xx33 to xx40 that corresponds to the Up Chester arrival each hour, to give it the most flexibility in which platform at Euston it can arrive in to make its return working at xx10.

Except at Peak times for the extra Liverpool departures?