An extra 3min on four stops is 12min on the journey, which makes a big dent in the difference between HS2 and classic times.
If they want speed end to end I assume they would take the 12 trains per hour that don't stop at the intermediate stations
And those who don't care particularily about speed could take the other six that could be priced even more cheaply than normal high speed fares.
You are talking about a new railway through built-up areas, where due to the need for loops at stops it will be four track, so with modern clearances for high speed probably at least 50% wider than the WCML.
Clever layout of stations and station approaches can tend to ameliorate the track spacing requirements, for example if you were to play the 'loop tracks' in the centre with an island platform you don't need the large spacings between the two inner tracks as they won't be high speed for most of their length.
And track used surface is not actually a large determinant in the width of the alignment.
After all HS2 states that its normal alignment width fence-to-fence should be 22m.
Which considering it includes about 3m of actual track width and 4.5m of track spacing demonstrates that it is not.
Plus huge stations on prime town centre sites or even underground.
There is something of a happy medium between town centre sites and stations in a beet field.
How much more will that cost in construction and property acquisition, and what proportion of the local residents will never use it but still have to suffer the inconvenience?
This project is already costing ludicrous amounts of money. I could have six intermediate stations and spend £2bn on each and every one of them [which should buy a two platform station with two through lines] and not increase the cost of the scheme by more than 30%.
And be careful where you point that suffering inconvenience for something they will never use argument - that sword cuts both ways.
But to serve all those places will need more curves, so the speed may end up being lower.
Yes, but the alignment at 320kph has a much less stringent set of minimum curve radius requirements than 360kph or 400kph.
It is highly likely you could arrange an acceptable alignment.
If high speed rail is going to work in the British environment [given its truly enormous capital cost] it is going to have to be high density, highly reliable and cheap ticketted.
Scattering short trains to every halt in every corner of the land from its classic compatible accesses will not achieve any of those things.