Starting over: a redesigned UK rail network

[HSTEd]

That would be a definite advantage to starting nowadays - gargantuan gauging.

It would be interesting to build a Breitspurbhan Shinkansen.
Where your cross section is comparable to a wide body airliner the capacity is rather.... impressive.

 

[robbeech]

I think what we have established here is whilst there might be some changes to the services and diagrams the actual track layout wouldn’t differ too much in the grand scheme of things. There’s probably a reason for this.

 

[backontrack]

Here are a couple more maps.

Mainline only: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/edit?mid=1NsBfbss_hEEe8jKHAp2Ds1vwQMifRaE9&ll=54.38619143717634,-9.189033418445774&z=6

Here are the GNER routes out of King's Cross. At Peterborough, they would become Connect services.

The beauty of this approach is simple. Take the western line, for example. Passengers from York will view this as a stopping service to Selby or Doncaster, passengers from Selby and Doncaster will view it as a stopping London service, passengers from Newark or Grantham will view it as a fast London service. And not all services would serve all stations. Some stations, such as Pinchbeck (not shown here), would be served only by other trains - in Pinchbeck's case, services from Lincoln to Peterborough via Ruskington and Sleaford.

 

[Moonshot]

So if somehow a brand new network was built overnight, a absolute must is no level crossings at all.

 

[gsnedders]

If we have no infrastructure at all, it makes the maglev route seem much more appealing (given a large part of the argument against maglev trains is the need for new alignments into cities, etc., rather than sharing existing rights of way).

 

[Comstock]

Once you start to analyse things you realise that some places that are important towns & Cities in the present day are only important because of railways. Does anyone seriously think that somewhere like York would have developed into it's present day status (as an important rail junction). Without railways York would just be a small place with a Minister/Cathedral, Likewise Darlington wouldn't be the main ECML railhead for Teesside.

This is a fair point, but don't forget we aren't imagining here a world were we'd never had railways, just a world where they were butchered in the 1960s and finished off in the 80s. That's not so hard to invisage.

After 1960 railways had much less effect on how the economy developed and where the population went, although my own city (Derby) would probably gone into an even steeper decline in the 1970s had the railway works closed.

 

[D365]

Here are the GNER routes out of King's Cross. At Peterborough, they would become Connect services.View attachment 41621

Just a minor point, but I’d be very very interested to know; how do you propose connecting St Neots to Godmanchester to Huntingdon, without burying the Great Ouse?

 

[whhistle]

Bringing this a little more up to date, I'm surprised they're not doing this with the Midland Mainline.
Nearly all stations (certainly those south of Loughborough) are either insignificant (sorry Ivanhoe line!) or near east/west coast stations.
So why not widen where they can, take out the kinks, raise bridges / lower land and re-build the Midland Mainline into a railway that can cope with growth.
Then do the same with the East Coast.
Lots of money yes. Years of disruption yes, but a brand new railway.

 

[backontrack]

Just a minor point, but I’d be very very interested to know; how do you propose connecting St Neots to Godmanchester to Huntingdon, without burying the Great Ouse?

A bridge? I honestly haven't put much thought into the minutiae; it's basically a sketch of what the network might look like.

 

[D365]

A bridge? I honestly haven't put much thought into the minutiae; it's basically a sketch of what the network might look like.

Those towns are very familiar to me, hence the question. But as it’s all fantasy I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt for the time being

 

[Bevan Price]

Well - if all our railways had closed post-Marples, most of the city centre station sites would have been cleared and sold for redevelopment, so you would have the same problem as trying to reinstate the GCR via Nottingham Victoria - horrendous cost of compulsory purchase of city & town centre sites for stations. Likewise, many of the original trackbeds would have been cleared & sold. In all probability, the only option would have been stations & long tunnels beneath towns & cities.

So assuming unlimited funds and a need for (mostly) totally new alignments - and for the moment ignoring suburban services, Assuming modern high-performance trains, so that steep gradients were relatively unimportant, I would suggest starting with (starting in the north), showing principal stations only:

1. Ayr - Glasgow (New Central) - Stirling - Perth - Dundee - Aberdeen
2. Glasgow (New Central) - Cumbernauld - Falkirk - Edinburgh .
3. Glasgow - Lanark - Dumfries - Carlisle
4. Edinburgh - Galashiels - Morpeth - Newcastle.

5. Carlisle - Penrith - Windermere - Lancaster - Preston - Bolton - Manchester (New Central) - Stoke - Wolverhampton - Birmingham - Stratford Upon Avon - Oxford - High Wycombe - London (New Central), (plus Preston - Liverpool - Chester - Stoke loop. & Preston - Wigan - Warrington - Stoke loop)

6. Newcastle - Durham - Stockton/Middlesbrough - York - Sheffield - Nottingham - Leicester - Northampton - London.

7. Liverpool - St. Helens - Leigh - Manchester - Rochdale - Huddersfield - Leeds (New Central) - Hull & York. (with secondary line, Huddersfield - Bradford - Leeds)

8. Manchester - Sheffield - Doncaster - Hull
9. York - Doncaster - Lincoln - - (Sleaford) - Peterborough - Ely - Cambridge - Hertford - London
10. Norwich - Ipswich - Colchester - Chelmsford - London.
11. London - Chatham - Canterbury - Dover
12. London - Maidstone - Ashford - Folkestone
13. London - Sevenoaks - Tonbridge - Hastings, with branch to Eastbourne.
14. London - Croydon - Brighton
15. London - Leatherhead - Horsham - Chichester (direct) - Portsmouth
16. London - Guildford - Winchester - Southampton / Bournemouth / Weymouth.
17. London - Reading - Basingstoke - Salisbury - Yeovil - Taunton - Exeter - Plymouth (direct) - Penzance.
18. London - Reading - Swindon - Bath - Bristol - (new tunnel) - Newport - Cardiff - Swansea
19. Southampton - Salisbury - Swindon - Gloucester & Bristol - Gloucester - Worcester - Birmingham.
20. Birmingham - Leicester - Peterborough - Kings Lynn - Norwich.

Most main lines would be 4 or 6 tracks, to allow for slower passenger trains & plenty of freight.
Additional secondary lines would connect to one or more of the above lines - as/when affordable.

 

[Tom B]

In some areas, even with modern engineering and electric traction, there will be geographical limits - hills, mountains, etc. So your blue sky thinking may be clouded by the constraints which resulted in the lines being where they are now, if there's no alternative.

And again, if the railways were really shut down in the 60s and formations ripped up, places like London would become VERY difficult to lay new lines into (albeit London was in decline in the 70/80s, they'd all be hipster creative coffee centres or something by now). So, unless your stations are around the M25, you'd probably be looking at tunnelling from (in the case of the ECML) Hadley Wood all the way to wherever the end of your line is. Considering that LU would have developed differently in the interim (in terms of capacity upgrades etc), you may well want to put your termini elsewhere, group them together, or create through routes.

Mind you, I presume that at least some part of the network would have been used for new roads. The ECML mirrors the A1 to a greater or lesser extent, for instance.

On the subject of LUL, in the scenario described is it inconceivable to suggest that some of the moves to tfl control that have occurred in recent years (London Overground, TfL rail etc) would have happened many years ago?

 

[A Challenge]

Here are a couple more maps.

Mainline only: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/edit?mid=1NsBfbss_hEEe8jKHAp2Ds1vwQMifRaE9&ll=54.38619143717634,-9.189033418445774&z=6

That link is to a page saying I need permission to view - request sent for access but might be an idea to make it view only for everyone.

 

[backontrack]

That link is to a page saying I need permission to view - request sent for access but might be an idea to make it view only for everyone.

Ooh, yes, sorry - changed. Anyone can access it now.

 

[HowardGWR]

"starting over" - starting over what? This is the UK Rail thread isn't it?

 

[backontrack]

"starting over" - starting over what? This is the UK Rail thread isn't it?

It's about starting over with an entire new network. Theoretically, imagine if Beeching and Serpell had succeeded in shutting down the entire network. What would the network look like now, if you could build a new one from scratch?

------------------------

Anyway, here's an updated Edinburgh network map: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/1/e...ll=55.95633320655608,-3.2937509690596016&z=10

 

[HSTEd]

The argument that we would be building maglevs is an interesting one, we certainly wouldn't be using our current loading gauge

 

[backontrack]

Well - if all our railways had closed post-Marples, most of the city centre station sites would have been cleared and sold for redevelopment, so you would have the same problem as trying to reinstate the GCR via Nottingham Victoria - horrendous cost of compulsory purchase of city & town centre sites for stations. Likewise, many of the original trackbeds would have been cleared & sold. In all probability, the only option would have been stations & long tunnels beneath towns & cities.

So assuming unlimited funds and a need for (mostly) totally new alignments - and for the moment ignoring suburban services, Assuming modern high-performance trains, so that steep gradients were relatively unimportant, I would suggest starting with (starting in the north), showing principal stations only:

1. Ayr - Glasgow (New Central) - Stirling - Perth - Dundee - Aberdeen
2. Glasgow (New Central) - Cumbernauld - Falkirk - Edinburgh .
3. Glasgow - Lanark - Dumfries - Carlisle
4. Edinburgh - Galashiels - Morpeth - Newcastle.

5. Carlisle - Penrith - Windermere - Lancaster - Preston - Bolton - Manchester (New Central) - Stoke - Wolverhampton - Birmingham - Stratford Upon Avon - Oxford - High Wycombe - London (New Central), (plus Preston - Liverpool - Chester - Stoke loop. & Preston - Wigan - Warrington - Stoke loop)

6. Newcastle - Durham - Stockton/Middlesbrough - York - Sheffield - Nottingham - Leicester - Northampton - London.

7. Liverpool - St. Helens - Leigh - Manchester - Rochdale - Huddersfield - Leeds (New Central) - Hull & York. (with secondary line, Huddersfield - Bradford - Leeds)

8. Manchester - Sheffield - Doncaster - Hull
9. York - Doncaster - Lincoln - - (Sleaford) - Peterborough - Ely - Cambridge - Hertford - London
10. Norwich - Ipswich - Colchester - Chelmsford - London.
11. London - Chatham - Canterbury - Dover
12. London - Maidstone - Ashford - Folkestone
13. London - Sevenoaks - Tonbridge - Hastings, with branch to Eastbourne.
14. London - Croydon - Brighton
15. London - Leatherhead - Horsham - Chichester (direct) - Portsmouth
16. London - Guildford - Winchester - Southampton / Bournemouth / Weymouth.
17. London - Reading - Basingstoke - Salisbury - Yeovil - Taunton - Exeter - Plymouth (direct) - Penzance.
18. London - Reading - Swindon - Bath - Bristol - (new tunnel) - Newport - Cardiff - Swansea
19. Southampton - Salisbury - Swindon - Gloucester & Bristol - Gloucester - Worcester - Birmingham.
20. Birmingham - Leicester - Peterborough - Kings Lynn - Norwich.

Most main lines would be 4 or 6 tracks, to allow for slower passenger trains & plenty of freight.
Additional secondary lines would connect to one or more of the above lines - as/when affordable.

I've mapped your mainlines out for you here: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/e...w&ll=54.36797597217566,-8.853164716486049&z=6

 

[Oxfordblues]

What a fascinating thread! Just to look at an area I know: the Fylde in West Lancashire. The first railway was a straight line from Preston (Maudlands) to Fleetwood, then a branch was built to Lytham and later another to Blackpool (Talbot Road). Subsequently the Lytham branch was extended to Blackpool (Central) and finally a short-cut was constructed from Kirkham via Marton to Blackpool (South). So there was no real strategic planning, with Blackpool very much an afterthought. You even had to walk across Preston from the North Union station to Maudlands until the lines was link-up four years after opening.

With foresight of the massive growth of Blackpool they would probably have built two routes: a direct line from Preston via Freckleton to Lytham, then all the way round the coast via Blackpool to Fleetwood (instead of the tram line); and a fast line following the existing route to Kirkham and the Marton line to Blackpool. The only place to miss-out would be Poulton-le-Fylde. The Knott End branch would never have been contemplated!

 

[fowler9]

Given that this is fantasy realm stuff it is a bit disappointing to see most peoples idea of starting from scratch is still a slightly different version of what we have now and major cities being given the same importance as small commuter towns in the south east with London being the beating heart of everything. i mean, y know, if you could start afresh would you really still try and funnel everything down to the bottom right hand corner of the country when there is no need?

 

[B&I]

Given that this is fantasy realm stuff it is a bit disappointing to see most peoples idea of starting from scratch is still a slightly different version of what we have now and major cities being given the same importance as small commuter towns in the south east with London being the beating heart of everything. i mean, y know, if you could start afresh would you really still try and funnel everything down to the bottom right hand corner of the country when there is no need?

I had assumed the premise of all of this was how you would plan the railways on the basis of either the country as it now Is, or how it would be if it had continued to develop as it was pre-1825. If we are starting with a completely blank sheet, I would move the capital to somewhere in the middle of the country and farm out most of the various government departments, and large service sector employers, throughout the promises.

 

[backontrack]

What a fascinating thread! Just to look at an area I know: the Fylde in West Lancashire. The first railway was a straight line from Preston (Maudlands) to Fleetwood, then a branch was built to Lytham and later another to Blackpool (Talbot Road). Subsequently the Lytham branch was extended to Blackpool (Central) and finally a short-cut was constructed from Kirkham via Marton to Blackpool (South). So there was no real strategic planning, with Blackpool very much an afterthought. You even had to walk across Preston from the North Union station to Maudlands until the lines was link-up four years after opening.

With foresight of the massive growth of Blackpool they would probably have built two routes: a direct line from Preston via Freckleton to Lytham, then all the way round the coast via Blackpool to Fleetwood (instead of the tram line); and a fast line following the existing route to Kirkham and the Marton line to Blackpool. The only place to miss-out would be Poulton-le-Fylde. The Knott End branch would never have been contemplated!

Thank you! What you've suggested all seems sane indeed. I wonder however - which, of the two routes, would have been the mainline? I mean, the faster route would have the speed advantage, but would miss out on a couple of largish conurbations.

 

[backontrack]

Given that this is fantasy realm stuff it is a bit disappointing to see most peoples idea of starting from scratch is still a slightly different version of what we have now and major cities being given the same importance as small commuter towns in the south east with London being the beating heart of everything. i mean, y know, if you could start afresh would you really still try and funnel everything down to the bottom right hand corner of the country when there is no need?

I had assumed the premise of all of this was how you would plan the railways on the basis of either the country as it now Is, or how it would be if it had continued to develop as it was pre-1825. If we are starting with a completely blank sheet, I would move the capital to somewhere in the middle of the country and farm out most of the various government departments, and large service sector employers, throughout the promises.

As would I, B&I.

Part of the reason why the southeast gets a lot of it is because that's our nearest link to the European subcontinent. But it's all in the mindset. We should drop the idea that northern towns and cities should make do without investment, and treat the regions equally.

 

[backontrack]

Well, from a fresh start, we'd need to start with a simple, baseline network. I'd start by building a London superstation, with 60 platforms in a circular arrangement - six for each of the ten service groups:
Anglia - largely mirrors the real-world GEML, with stations at Ilford, Chelmsford, Colchester, Ipswich, Stowmarket, Diss and Norwich.
Anglia Commuter - a hybrid between the current C2C and Crossrail, operating slower services to Colchester via Southend - stations at Canary Wharf, London City Airport (which in this alternate world has subsumed the dock and acts as a budget airport), Barking, Rainham, Grays, Basildon, Wickford, South Woodham Ferrers, Maldon, Tiptree, Marks Tey and Colchester. 100mph linespeed.
Kent - operating the commuter lines from Kent. Stations at Dartford, Gravesend, Chatham (Medway Parkway), Maidstone, Ashford, Folkestone and Dover.
Hampshire - services to the South Coast. Stations at Croydon, Guildford, Alton, Winchester, Southampton, Brockenhurst, Bournemouth and Weymouth.
Devon and Cornwall - services to the far reaches of the country. Stations at Slough, Bracknell, Basingstoke, Andover, Salisbury, Blandford Forum, Yeovil, Chard, Honiton, Exeter, Newton Abbot, Totnes, Plymouth, Bodmin, Truro and Penzance.
Wales - services to Wales. Stations at Slough, Reading, Newbury, Swindon, Chippenham, Bath, Bristol, Newport, Cardiff, Bridgend and Swansea
Lancaster - services to the North West and Scotland. Stations at Watford, High Wycombe, Oxford, Banbury, Leamington Spa, Coventry, Birmingham, Wolverhampton, Stafford, Stoke, Crewe, Northwich, Warrington, Wigan, Preston, Lancaster, Kendal, Penrith, Carlisle, Dumfries, Kilmarnock, Glasgow, Stirling, Perth and Dundee.
Northamptonshire - the slower, commuter services connecting to Coventry on the Lancaster services. Stations at Edgware, Watford, St Albans, Luton, Leighton Buzzard, Milton Keynes, Northampton, Rugby and Coventry.
Yorkshire - Services to Yorkshire, mirroring the Midland Mainline. Stations at Luton, Bedford, Kettering, Leicester, Loughborough, Nottingham, Mansfield, Sheffield, Barnsley, Wakefield, Leeds and York.
Lothian - largely a mirror of the current WAML and ECML. Stations at Stansted Airport, Cambridge, Peterborough, Grantham, Lincoln, Doncaster, York, Darlington, Durham, Sunderland, Newcastle, Berwick upon Tweed, Dunbar, Edinburgh, Dunfermline, Perth and Dundee.

All of the services will operate on mid to highspeed electrified lines, running at a maximum speed of 150mph (about 240kmph). The stock will be double deck for maximum capacity.

In addition to this, there will also be an outer London circular railway, maintaining an average distance of 30 miles outside the capital. This will operate a maximum speed of 100mph.

Other large cities, such as Manchester, will have developed their own suburban railway networks and metros, and as such, are not the focus.

Ticketing would be much simplified in this universe, considering most major services operate from the London Superterminus. A flat rate of 40p per mile travelled, or 60p in First Class. And it'd all be controlled by one national entity.

Here's a map of it all: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1r9WL7w_POgQTXOrPzSQbnJxgjSsrGjLN&ll=54.31341782329824,-10.820086664947667&z=6

I've shared this with the account you use on the Fantasy League, so you can make changes if I've got it all wrong (which is quite likely TBH)

 

[HSTEd]

If you were going to start from scratch via a Breitspurbahn, you would likely have double deck platforms and only ever have twin track railways, indeed all lines would probably adopt the Barcelona Solution as standard (open doors on both sides).

 

[DasLunatic]

Here's a map of it all: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/edit?mid=1r9WL7w_POgQTXOrPzSQbnJxgjSsrGjLN&ll=54.31341782329824,-10.820086664947667&z=6

I've shared this with the account you use on the Fantasy League, so you can make changes if I've got it all wrong (which is quite likely TBH)

That's about right - but methinks I need some more lines not via London...

 

[SEClass375]

I am going to try and make a network diagram map like existing ones for the original services that backontrack has proposed for the county/area that I live in (Kent) for comparison.

Slight Warning: I may not finish it but I am going to give it a go

 

[satisnek]

With reference to the 'Hardest Rail lines to reinstate' thread, would railways be a viable option if faced with this scenario, or would there be investment in alternative technologies instead?

 

[birchesgreen]

An interesting thought experiment.

I'd make Birmingham the national rail hub to the major cities (high speed OHLE natch) but with a quad track line down to that there London.

 

[backontrack]

I am going to try and make a network diagram map like existing ones for the original services that backontrack has proposed for the county/area that I live in (Kent) for comparison.

Slight Warning: I may not finish it but I am going to give it a go

Or would you like me to do it? Obviously you can do it if you want, but if you'd rather I did it, I'm happy to...