The benefits of the current HS2 situation

[Fazaar1889]

It's been a while since the two northern legs were cancelled and since then, I've only hesrd that this causes more problems. Which I agree with, such as the increased traffic between Birmingham and Manchester on wcml.

Are there any benefits as of right now with solely track between London and Birmingham. Will it relieve that much traffic on the wcml? Because surely, there's now less capacity further along, so any relief will be canceled right? Apologies, I haven't read a full explanation of how currently HS2 will fit with the wider network.

 

[30907]

AIUI HS2 will (also) join the WCML at Handsacre so making services to the NW possible. Once that is open there will be greater benefit, though not as much as going to Crewe would be.

 

[Fazaar1889]

AIUI HS2 will (also) join the WCML at Handsacre so making services to the NW possible. Once that is open there will be greater benefit, though not as much as going to Crewe would be.

So there will still be some extra capacity on the southern part of the wcml, but not that much further north west?

 

[edwin_m]

So there will still be some extra capacity on the southern part of the wcml, but not that much further north west?

It's arguably worse further north, because some London trains will use HS2 and others will stay on the existing route. So unless extra services are provided (which there probably isn't capacity for), there's a risk of Manchester and Liverpool having a mix of services from Euston and from OOC. Passengers won't know which one to head for if they want the next train, so that's an effective reduction in frequency. This improves somewhat if and when HS2 extends to Euston, because at least then everything is leaving from the same place.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would allow an improved local service south of Northampton, though it's questionable as to whether that's actually needed now with reduced commuting.

It's arguably worse further north, because some London trains will use HS2 and others will stay on the existing route. So unless extra services are provided (which there probably isn't capacity for), there's a risk of Manchester and Liverpool having a mix of services from Euston and from OOC. Passengers won't know which one to head for if they want the next train, so that's an effective reduction in frequency. This improves somewhat if and when HS2 extends to Euston, because at least then everything is leaving from the same place.

The way the fares system is going, everyone will know which station to go to as they will have an effectively mandatory advance booking. I would be absolutely astonished if HS2 had any walk up fares at all, possibly not even Anytime ones.

 

[Northerngirl]

I think forcing bookings would be the final nail in making the whole line pointless, it's an idiotic idea anywhere, especially on a very short line that has so much crossover with existing services

 

[Meerkat]

I think forcing bookings would be the final nail in making the whole line pointless, it's an idiotic idea anywhere, especially on a very short line that has so much crossover with existing services

Unless the train is full you will presumably be able to ‘book’ at the stations? It’s just that your ticket will be for a specific train.

 

[ChrisC]

I think forcing bookings would be the final nail in making the whole line pointless, it's an idiotic idea anywhere, especially on a very short line that has so much crossover with existing services

Why shouldn’t it be run in a similar way to HS1 to destinations in Kent. Ordinary walk on fares but with a small supplement for using the high speed route.

 

[robspaceman]

I would have thought /hoped that London-Birmingham tickets should be *cheaper* or at least the same price as LMR fares to New Street, as there will be such enormous capacity compared with Intercity/Avanti's current offering from Euston-New Street that they'll need to fill it somehow... But yes perhaps you're right and there will sadly be a high speed premium to pay

 

[Bletchleyite]

I would have thought /hoped that London-Birmingham tickets should be *cheaper* or at least the same price as LMR fares to New Street, as there will be such enormous capacity compared with Intercity/Avanti's current offering from Euston-New Street that they'll need to fill it somehow... But yes perhaps you're right and there will sadly be a high speed premium to pay

As demonstrated by the super-high Anytime fares on Avanti's routes, maximising income and maximising bums on seats are not the same thing, so I doubt it. One person at £200 makes more money than ten at £15.

 

[A S Leib]

The way the fares system is going, everyone will know which station to go to as they will have an effectively mandatory advance booking. I would be absolutely astonished if HS2 had any walk up fares at all, possibly not even Anytime ones.

I can't remember which services were supposed to be 200 vs 400 m, beyond the splitting ones (e.g. London – Liverpool / Lancaster), but I think trains are meant to have capacity for up to 1100 each; given current London – Birmingham capacity for Avanti, Chiltern and LNR combined is under 2000 passengers per hour, I'd be surprised if mandatory reservations were necessary. If the outcome's that reservations are mandatory but there's almost always lots of unreserved seats, what would be the point in making them mandatory?

 

[Bletchleyite]

I can't remember which services were supposed to be 200 vs 400 m, beyond the splitting ones (e.g. London – Liverpool / Lancaster), but I think trains are meant to have capacity for up to 1100 each; given current London – Birmingham capacity for Avanti, Chiltern and LNR combined is under 2000 passengers per hour, I'd be surprised if mandatory reservations were necessary. If the outcome's that reservations are mandatory but there's almost always lots of unreserved seats, what would be the point in making them mandatory?

Dynamic pricing. See the LNER trial.

Eurostar trains are similarly massive and them being full is fairly unusual, but they apply that airline-style pricing approach.

 

[Manutd1999]

Phase 1 will generate some benefits:

- Extra seats to Birmingham and significant journey time savings.
- More modest journey time savings to Manchester, Crewe and Liverpool.
- Extra capacity on the Coventry-Birmingham corridor (assuming Avanti services reduce from 3ph to 2ph).
- Huge increase in capacity on the WCML fast lines south of Nuneaton. This could be used in a variety of ways, potentially increasing frequency to Northampton and/or moving some semi-fast services across from the slow lines to create space for more stoppers.

 

[BrianW]

I would have thought /hoped that London-Birmingham tickets should be *cheaper* or at least the same price as LMR fares to New Street, as there will be such enormous capacity compared with Intercity/Avanti's current offering from Euston-New Street that they'll need to fill it somehow... But yes perhaps you're right and there will sadly be a high speed premium to pay

I imagine that New Labour's version of Great British Railways will have some input/ effect if HS2 is running while they are still in
Maybe the black hole will be a thing of the past by then?

 

[A S Leib]

Would 2 Avanti tph calling at Watford Junction or an hourly Avanti service at Tamworth or Lichfield Trent Valley be doable with HS2 only going as far as Handsacre? (Rugby and Nuneaton have one of the Manchesters in addition to the pre-Covid 1 tph Birmingham at Rugby.)

 

[Nottingham59]

Are there any benefits as of right now

If you mean by "right now" when HS2 phase 1 is completed, including the Handsacre junction?
I see plenty of benefits:

• massive increase in overall capacity between London and Birmingham.
• Releasing capacity in Birmingham New St, as the London fast services get diverted to Curzon St
• increased capacity in the southern WCML, as the fast lines can carry a more regular stopping pattern. For example, every fast train will stop at Milton Keynes.
• More frequent commuting services from places like Rugby and Tamworth
• released capacity at Euston
• faster access to Heathrow from the north
• faster journeys to Manchester, Liverpool, Glasgow from London
• many more trains possible south of Lichfield
• 400m trains possible London - Edinburgh, faster than going via the East Coast

There are downsides, too:

• The WCML will be exposed as a loss-making basket case without the premium paying busines passengers to subsidise the rest
• Aston and Central Birmingham will become commuter suburbs for London, as will Solihull even more than it is now
• More difficult interchanges at Birmingham International / Interchange and at New St / Curzon St
• Reduced capacity London - Manchester with shorter 200m trains
• Fewer direct trains Manchester - Bristol and Manchester - Oxford. I'd expect those paths to be sacrificed to HS2 trains north of Stafford
• Fewer trains and reduced capacity from Birmingham northwards to Manchester, Liverpool, Crewe.
• diitto north from Milton Keynes. I can only see 1tph fast and 1tph slow north of Lichfield on the WCML through Handsacre. Given the constraints at Colwich, the imperative will be to push as many HS2 services as possible through that bottleneck

 

[The Planner]

If you mean by "right now" when HS2 phase 1 is completed, including the Handsacre junction?
I see plenty of benefits:

• Releasing capacity in Birmingham New St, as the London fast services get diverted to Curzon St

It will likely release just the one path as it stands. It would allow the Cov corridor to be recast, but its not game changing.

• increased capacity in the southern WCML, as the fast lines can carry a more regular stopping pattern. For example, every fast train will stop at Milton Keynes.
• More frequent commuting services from places like Rugby and Tamworth

Rugby yes, Tamworth, not so much.

• many more trains possible south of Lichfield

That is a waste though if you come to a juddering halt at Lichfield as you cannot get further north.

• Fewer direct trains Manchester - Bristol and Manchester - Oxford. I'd expect those paths to be sacrificed to HS2 trains north of Stafford

I don't.

• Fewer trains and reduced capacity from Birmingham northwards to Manchester, Liverpool, Crewe.

Why?

 

[A S Leib]

Is it possible to terminate and reverse London-bound trains at Nuneaton, Tamworth or Lichfield Trent Valley High Level? Nuneaton – Euston is 106,000 journeys per year vs 18,000 for Nuneaton – Stafford, Crewe, Chester, Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Piccadilly, and Tamworth's similar, so far more trains going south than north past Lichfield from there shouldn't be a massive issue.

 

[Nottingham59]

Is it possible to terminate and reverse London-bound trains at Nuneaton, Tamworth or Lichfield Trent Valley High Level? Nuneaton – Euston is 106,000 journeys per year vs 18,000 for Nuneaton – Stafford, Crewe, Chester, Liverpool Lime Street and Manchester Piccadilly, and Tamworth's similar, so far more trains going south than north past Lichfield from there shouldn't be a massive issue.

The only places I can see terminating Trent Valley trains are Nuneaton or Lichfield (where there are three sidings on the Up side where trains could reverse). The Trent Valley lines will be almost empty after HS2 phase 1 opens, so it should be easy enough to timetable the crossovers.

North of Lichfield, I expect 2tph, max. South of Nuneaton, I'd expect 4tph, but they will be fairly empty, like Thameslink in Bedfordshire. Maybe 6tph in the commuting peaks, if they're lucky.

 

[PTR 444]

I suppose one benefit of the current situation is that it has opened up an opportunity to build a connection from HS2 to the Colwich - Stoke Line. While still sub-optimal than building Phase 2 all the way into Central Manchester, building a shorter link to Hixon at least avoids the capacity constraints that would occur at Colwich from opening of Phase 1, and Wilmslow between the opening of Phase 2a and Phase 2b.

In the current economic climate, I think building from Handsacre - Hixon is probably the best we will get in terms of value for money. It keeps all London - Manchester via Stoke trains segregated from the main WCML, while potentially allowing direct Curzon Street - Manchester trains to commence earlier than planned.

 

[Nottingham59]

I don't.

As I see it, passengers heading to Manchester from Oxford will change at Interchange; passengers from Bristol will walk to Curzon St. There will be much less demand than now for long-distance Cross Country traffic to make the slow plod through Wolverhampton.

At the moment, there are limited paths in south Manchester for fast trains to London and Birmingham. There are 2tph Cross Country paths via Stoke, and three Avanti paths (2tph via Stoke and 1tph via Wilmslow). Without intervention, there doesn't seem to be scope to increase this.

With HS2 built to Handsacre, it would be possible to use these 5tph paths from Manchester as follows:

1. HS2 (200m) to London via Wilmslow, calling at Crewe and Interchange
2. HS2 (200m) to London via Stoke, calling at Interchange
3. HS2 (200m) to London via Stoke, then non-stop to give the fastest service.
4. HS2 (200m) to London via Curzon St (reverse)
5. Pendolino (11-car?) to Birmingham New St via Stoke and Wolverhampton.

Overall this give 4tph from Manchester to Birmingham, and 4tph from Manchester to London. This is an significant increase in frequency from current levels, which should keep the mayors happy. The HS2 200m trains could join to make 400m consists at Crewe or Curzon St, but this would add minutes to journey times.

There would of course be other HS2 trains from London to Liverpool and Preston/Scotland. The total number depends on how many trains can be fitted through the bottleneck at Colwich, and the capacity of Crewe.

And if you want to keep through trains from Bristol and Oxford to the North West, then you can send these to Liverpool or Preston instead; paths through south Manchester will be too precious to waste on 4 or 5 car Voyagers.

 

[stevieinselby]

I can't remember which services were supposed to be 200 vs 400 m, beyond the splitting ones (e.g. London – Liverpool / Lancaster), but I think trains are meant to have capacity for up to 1100 each; given current London – Birmingham capacity for Avanti, Chiltern and LNR combined is under 2000 passengers per hour, I'd be surprised if mandatory reservations were necessary. If the outcome's that reservations are mandatory but there's almost always lots of unreserved seats, what would be the point in making them mandatory?

Basically any trains running entirely on the HS2 network were planned to be 400m trains, and most/all trains (or portions) serving stations on the classic network would be 200m.

The original plan was to have 400m trains running on the following routes:

• London to Birmingham
• London to Manchester
• London to Leeds
• London to Carlisle >> split for Glasgow and Edinburgh
• London to Crewe >> split for Liverpool and Lancaster
• London to East Midlands >> split for Sheffield and Leeds or York

Although that plan would have 400m trains calling at classic stations Preston and Carlisle, which can't accommodate 400m trains (although they aren't far off) so I assume some works would have been needed to lengthen platforms at those stations.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Although that plan would have 400m trains calling at classic stations Preston and Carlisle, which can't accommodate 400m trains (although they aren't far off) so I assume some works would have been needed to lengthen platforms at those stations.

I don't know about Carlisle, but there was certainly a plan to extend the 3-4 island at Preston to 400m, which as you say isn't much of an extension. It would remove the bays 3C and 4C, so the former postal traffic (Rail Express Systems) platforms would be reinstated for the use of the Colne and Ormskirk services.

 

[Mgameing123]

I would have thought /hoped that London-Birmingham tickets should be *cheaper* or at least the same price as LMR fares to New Street, as there will be such enormous capacity compared with Intercity/Avanti's current offering from Euston-New Street that they'll need to fill it somehow... But yes perhaps you're right and there will sadly be a high speed premium to pay

A HIGH SPEED PREMIUM. ARE THE POLITICIANS DRUNK? A high speed line made to increase capacity should not have a premium. They are just keeping commuters on the old line.

Basically any trains running entirely on the HS2 network were planned to be 400m trains, and most/all trains (or portions) serving stations on the classic network would be 200m.

The original plan was to have 400m trains running on the following routes:

• London to Birmingham
• London to Manchester
• London to Leeds
• London to Carlisle >> split for Glasgow and Edinburgh
• London to Crewe >> split for Liverpool and Lancaster
• London to East Midlands >> split for Sheffield and Leeds or York

Although that plan would have 400m trains calling at classic stations Preston and Carlisle, which can't accommodate 400m trains (although they aren't far off) so I assume some works would have been needed to lengthen platforms at those stations.

If the Leeds section was made wouldn’t they run a London to Edinburgh via Leeds train?

 

[A S Leib]

If the Leeds section was made wouldn’t they run a London to Edinburgh via Leeds train?

All the Edinburgh services were planned to go via Carlisle, with Newcastle getting an hourly 200 m service to Curzon Street via Durham, Darlington, York and East Midlands Hub and 2 200 m tph to Euston via Darlington (1 tph), York and Old Oak Common. I'd guess Leeds – Edinburgh would have either stayed on classic lines (connectivity with Wakefield etc.?) or something to plan for post-Northern Powerhouse Rail / HS3.

 

[daodao]

That is a waste though if you come to a juddering halt at Lichfield as you cannot get further north.

That is one of the 2 key problems with the curtailment of HS2 announced by Sunak just under a year ago, the other being OOC remaining the London terminal for an indefinite period. There needs to be some sort of relief route for the Rugeley-Stafford bottleneck on the WCML, in order that the part of HS2 being built will achieve reasonable benefits. Sunak was quite right to cancel HS2 phase 2b north of Crewe, but not phase 2a south of it.

 

[snowball]

If the Leeds section was made wouldn’t they run a London to Edinburgh via Leeds train?

The proposed track layout near Leeds did not include a triangular junction. Any Leeds-Edinburgh train would have to depart from Leeds towards London, travel a few miles to join the York-London line, then reverse.

And after a further relatively small number of miles to the Church Fenton area, the train would come to the end of the eastern arm of HS2 and be back on the traditional rail network, and could have got there more directly by starting from the non-HS2 part of Leeds station.

 

[edwin_m]

The proposed track layout near Leeds did not include a triangular junction. Any Leeds-Edinburgh train would have to depart from Leeds towards London, travel a few miles to join the York-London line, then reverse.

This was never planned, but if it was done it would probably have needed a connection to the classic network south of Leeds where HS2 would have followed the line from Wakefield Kirkgate. Through trains would then use this connection to leave HS2 and stop at one of the platforms of the existing station.

 

[stevieinselby]

If the Leeds section was made wouldn’t they run a London to Edinburgh via Leeds train?

No. The plan was for one branch to run to Leeds, terminating at new 400m platforms at right-angles to the current station, and another branch to join the ECML for trains to York and Newcastle.
The Leeds branch would be a dead-end, and would not allow through-running.
Furthermore, the ECML north of York is at capacity, and would not be able to cope with the additional services. All HS2 services to Scotland would run via Carlisle.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A HIGH SPEED PREMIUM. ARE THE POLITICIANS DRUNK? A high speed line made to increase capacity should not have a premium. They are just keeping commuters on the old line.

HS2 isn't for commuters. Indeed one of its key purposes is to free up capacity on the classic line for more commuter trains.