Whenceforth for the WCML?

[350401]

You could, but this way you can provide more HS2 services to more places than the HS2 full business case, which envisages fewer 400m trains through the bottleneck at Colwich.

Perhaps. The tragedy of HS2 is that the city-centre stations were not done first. Longer platforms at Piccadilly, with connecting chords, would have added capacity to long-distance services and also released paths for local trains. Same for Leeds.

Purely hypothetical; but if NPR got built from Liverpool to Marsden with a new station at Manchester Airport and a new station at Piccadilly, could a connecting chord be built from the Styal Line to the NPR Airport station, and then run into the tunnel into Piccadilly? Effectively HS2 is built to Handsacre, then run on the conventional network to Airport, and then back onto the HSR network.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Which was why I suggested using double-deck coaches that were no wider than existing stock.

Which don't provide significant additional capacity because they can't be seated above 2+1.

 

[The Planner]

Purely hypothetical; but if NPR got built from Liverpool to Marsden with a new station at Manchester Airport and a new station at Piccadilly, could a connecting chord be built from the Styal Line to the NPR Airport station, and then run into the tunnel into Piccadilly? Effectively HS2 is built to Handsacre, then run on the conventional network to Airport, and then back onto the HSR network.

Wilmslow would need some major rebuilding if you do that. It would suddenly become a Colwich. It probably wouldnt be a massive amount quicker either.

 

[AlastairFraser]

So. You can get plenty of WM passengers onto HS2. London to Birmingham on HS2 will not use ANY parts of the WCML. No need to spend money on improving Chiltern as HS2 can do it all for Birmingham. What is left will be people who want stations along the WCML and those who want the cheaper LNR service. You might get some passengers onto Chiltern at the right price but then it is possible to have some targeting of prices for HS2.

The West Mids and Birmingham are not one entity, a key point of mine.

 

[Peter Sarf]

The West Mids and Birmingham are not one entity, a key point of mine.

So I guess trying to entice people away from the Birmingham International to Rugby and on to London corridor via the WCML ?.

If so I wonder how many passengers there are. Would Leamington Spa down to Marylebone be an alternative. It would have to avoid New Street to Coventry as that is full so could/would pick up at a few stations from Moor Street to Leamington instead.

Not sure Marylebone has spare capacity. I know the number and length of services there has increased over the decades. Worth checking though and I generally think longer trains is better than more shorter trains.

 

[HSTEd]

If so I wonder how many passengers there are. Would Leamington Spa down to Marylebone be an alternative. It would have to avoid New Street to Coventry as that is full so could/would pick up at a few stations from Moor Street to Leamington instead.

From much of the West Midlands, especially that near the lines into Moor Street, wouldn't it be faster (and likely cheaper) to simply double back through Curzon Street?

It would certainly be cheaper for the railway for them to do that rather than trying to move people through Marylebone.

 

[Peter Sarf]

From much of the West Midlands, especially that near the lines into Moor Street, wouldn't it be faster (and likely cheaper) to simply double back through Curzon Street?

It would certainly be cheaper for the railway for them to do that rather than trying to move people through Marylebone.

I tend to agree. As far as Birmingham and the West Midland is concerned HS2 will trump a lot and does not cause any problems as it does not rely on any old infrastructure. It is the only complete bit possible.

It is beyond Handsacre that I wring my hands in agony. That is the challenge - filling up HS2 Phase1 without stuffing the WCML.

I know HS2 Phase2a would be obvious - oh shame !. Perhaps phase 2a should have been part of Phase 1 - the omission of that is probably now, looking backwards, a mistake. Does its omission, incorrectly, indicate to politicians that Phase2a was not essential ?.

Also I notice very little mention is being made in the media and by politicians (ie the real world) about HS2. This indicates to me how awful the situation is - I don't think non-rail people (the majority) give a damn about the railways. The balance might even be turning anti-railway - it is a sense I have. The railways are just seen as a problem and HS2 as proof. I know that perception is wrong but I think there is a need for a PR exercise.

Perhaps a PR exercise is what the railways should be working on ?.
Sort yer image out first and then ask for moneysupport for projects.

 

[snowball]

Purely hypothetical; but if NPR got built from Liverpool to Marsden with a new station at Manchester Airport and a new station at Piccadilly, could a connecting chord be built from the Styal Line to the NPR Airport station, and then run into the tunnel into Piccadilly? Effectively HS2 is built to Handsacre, then run on the conventional network to Airport, and then back onto the HSR network.

That link would have to be a giant U-turn in tunnel under the airport apron.

 

[AlastairFraser]

So I guess trying to entice people away from the Birmingham International to Rugby and on to London corridor via the WCML ?.

If so I wonder how many passengers there are. Would Leamington Spa down to Marylebone be an alternative. It would have to avoid New Street to Coventry as that is full so could/would pick up at a few stations from Moor Street to Leamington instead.

Not sure Marylebone has spare capacity. I know the number and length of services there has increased over the decades. Worth checking though and I generally think longer trains is better than more shorter trains.

Yes partly, you also would want to get a large share of passengers from Dudley/Sandwell/Walsall/Wolverhampton by extending more Moor St terminators through to Kidderminster.
If priced correctly, this could help provide additional capacity.

Marylebone doesn't have a huge amount of additional capacity, but you can add hundreds of seats an hour just by lengthening the current 4 car services to 8 (easier option, only 3 platforms need lengthening) or 12 car (more intensive).

 

[The Planner]

Yes partly, you also would want to get a large share of passengers from Dudley/Sandwell/Walsall/Wolverhampton by extending more Moor St terminators through to Kidderminster.
If priced correctly, this could help provide additional capacity.

Marylebone doesn't have a huge amount of additional capacity, but you can add hundreds of seats an hour just by lengthening the current 4 car services to 8 (easier option, only 3 platforms need lengthening) or 12 car (more intensive).

You would be extending platforms all the way from Moor St to Marylebone for 12. Marylebone also relies on permissive working.

 

[AlastairFraser]

You would be extending platforms all the way from Moor St to Marylebone for 12. Marylebone also relies on permissive working.

Yes, 8 car is the optimum uplift for that reason.
Sorry, I can't remember what permissive working means.
Can you give me a definition please?

 

[The Planner]

Yes, 8 car is the optimum uplift for that reason.
Sorry, I can't remember what permissive working means.
Can you give me a definition please?

Two trains sharing a platform.

 

[philosopher]

Yes partly, you also would want to get a large share of passengers from Dudley/Sandwell/Walsall/Wolverhampton by extending more Moor St terminators through to Kidderminster.
If priced correctly, this could help provide additional capacity.

Marylebone doesn't have a huge amount of additional capacity, but you can add hundreds of seats an hour just by lengthening the current 4 car services to 8 (easier option, only 3 platforms need lengthening) or 12 car (more intensive).

Given HS2 will almost certainly be going to Birmingham, to me it seems like money would be spent better elsewhere on the WCML north of Handsacre rather than on increasing capacity on the Chiltern Mainline.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

I you can believe the Sunday Express tomorrow its potentially game on

Secret government talks are being held next week to get the scrapped HS2 high-speed rail link back on track. A cross-party plan has been drawn up to complete the northern stretch of the line, ensuring the private sector foots most of the massive bill – not taxpayers. The blueprint will be discussed behind closed doors at a White-hall meeting between Transport Secretary Mark Harper and the mayors representing cities at both ends of the route.

There was an outcry last year when Rishi Sunak axed the Birmingham to Manchester section of the 225mph project due to delays and soaring costs, freeing up £36billion for other transport schemes. A southern section linking Birmingham and London is already under construction, costing £57billion. West Midlands Conservative Mayor Andy Street and Greater Manchester Labour Mayor Andy Burnham are working on a replacement scheme financed by private companies, including the rail firms.
The project will be overseen by Sir David Higgins, the former chairman of HS2 and chief executive of the 2012 London Olympics, now chairman of Gatwick Airport.

Mr Street said: “The mayors of the two regions are leading this but to be clear, with government support. By inviting the private sector in to play the maximum possible role, it can be significantly less costly for the public exchequer.”

Advice is being provided by leading engineering firms Arup, which is helping build the southern leg of HS2, and Mace Engineering, which oversaw improvements to the Great Western Main Line.
Options include constructing a new high-speed line or major upgrades of the West Coast Main Line, the existing rail connection between Manchester and Birmingham.

 

[eldomtom2]

Obviously it's in the Express' interest to portray the Tory axing of HS2 as "not a big deal". The big question is how much is the "private sector" willing to put up, and what do they expect to get out of it? HSR has never been built without hefty funding from government...

 

[350401]

One potential option, which I think was explored at the outset of HS2 but discounted at the time, is basically a PPP scheme where the private sector pays a fair chunk of the construction costs, in exchange for charging chunky track access charges to the WCML operator and taking commercial revenue from the stations; turning them into shopping centres with a station attached. I think this is similar to the HS1 model. My understanding is that this was considered for HS2, but discounted as the government wanted more control and to focus on building up the domestic HSR supply chain.

 

[Energy]

HSR has never been built without hefty funding from government...

HS1, at least phase one, was funded by privately issued bonds. Though they were government-backed.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Given HS2 will almost certainly be going to Birmingham, to me it seems like money would be spent better elsewhere on the WCML north of Handsacre rather than on increasing capacity on the Chiltern Mainline.

This is my point. Birmingham and the WM is the last thing we need to worry about as they will be fully served by HS2. Arguably a negative thing to try and abstract passengers from HS2 in that sector.

 

[eldomtom2]

HS1, at least phase one, was funded by privately issued bonds. Though they were government-backed.

Skimming the Wikipedia article, it looks like there was a fair bit of government support in quite a large variety of financial areas when it came to HS1...

 

[HSTEd]

HS1, at least phase one, was funded by privately issued bonds. Though they were government-backed.

Government backed bonds are, in many ways, functionally state bonds, given that they are guaranteed by the state in the same way as gilts.

It is mostly an accounting trick to hide government debt from the public.

 

[Energy]

It is mostly an accounting trick to hide government debt from the public.

Agreed, particularly as it wasn't particularly difficult for the government to restructure HS1 into its ownership.

Skimming the Wikipedia article, it looks like there was a fair bit of government support in quite a large variety of financial areas when it came to HS1...

HS1 was on budget, LCR was affected by Railtrack's collapse.

 

[Manutd1999]

I'm not sure either Manchester or Birmingham need 3ph from HS2 tbh, especially in the first phase when it only runs to OOC.

3x 400m + 2x semi-fast Pendalino's was always a ridiculous amount of capacity for Birmingham-Euston. For Manchester, there will still be a need to provide connectivity to Milton Keynes etc, so 2ph HS2 + 1ph Classic could be a better balance.

Maybe something like this?

6ph HS2
2ph OOC - Curzon Street (400m)
2ph OOC - Crewe - Manchester (400m, maybe with SDO if that's possible)
1ph OOC - Crewe - Liverpool / Warrington - Wigan - Preston - Lancaster (2x 200m, splitting at Crewe)
1ph OOC - Crewe - Preston - Carlisle - Glasgow (200m)

5ph 'classic' north of Handsacre
1ph Chester/Holyhead
1ph Manchester via Stoke
1ph Liverpool
2ph Crewe stoppers (slow lines until Colwich)

 

[The Planner]

I'm not sure either Manchester or Birmingham need 3ph from HS2 tbh, especially in the first phase when it only runs to OOC.

3x 400m + 2x semi-fast Pendalino's was always a ridiculous amount of capacity for Birmingham-Euston. For Manchester, there will still be a need to provide connectivity to Milton Keynes etc, so 2ph HS2 + 1ph Classic could be a better balance.

Maybe something like this?

6ph HS2
2ph OOC - Curzon Street (400m)
2ph OOC - Crewe - Manchester (400m, maybe with SDO if that's possible)
1ph OOC - Crewe - Liverpool / Warrington - Wigan - Preston - Lancaster (2x 200m, splitting at Crewe)
1ph OOC - Crewe - Preston - Carlisle - Glasgow (200m)

5ph 'classic' north of Handsacre
1ph Chester/Holyhead
1ph Manchester via Stoke
1ph Liverpool
2ph Crewe stoppers (slow lines until Colwich)

It will get hammered as soon as it opens to start recouping some of the cost, there will be 6 or 7 over Handsacre.

 

[Jack Hay]

It will get hammered as soon as it opens to start recouping some of the cost, there will be 6 or 7 over Handsacre.

I agree that on current plans, Handsacre and Colwich will be bottlenecks. But wherever HS2 ends is going to be a bottleneck. If phase 2a was built, Crewe would be the bottleneck. If HS2 was built in full, Crewe would still be a bottleneck, and Golborne would become another one.

 

[The Planner]

I agree that on current plans, Handsacre and Colwich will be bottlenecks. But wherever HS2 ends is going to be a bottleneck. If phase 2a was built, Crewe would be the bottleneck. If HS2 was built in full, Crewe would still be a bottleneck, and Golborne would become another one.

The remodeling of Crewe alleviated that considerably. Golborne wouldn't have been as it would be 2tph.

 

[Mountain Man]

Surely, it's not THAT had to work out if you're qualified enough to actually be the Prime Minister. It's simple "more trains+no new track=bad". I simply cannot fathom the scale or corporate negligence that Britain is facing from the top of the State right now

How many recent Prime Ministers would you consider qualified for the job?

 

[snowball]

If HS2 was built in full, Crewe would still be a bottleneck, and Golborne would become another one.

It seems unlikely that Crewe would be a bottleneck as it would be bypassed by a tunnel underneath the station as part of phase 2b. The next noticeable bottleneck north would not be at Golborne but north of Wigan where it becomes two tracks for a while, and then again north of Preston. But the further north you go, the fewer trains there are or need to be, until you get near Glasgow.

 

[Peter Sarf]

It seems unlikely that Crewe would be a bottleneck as it would be bypassed by a tunnel underneath the station as part of phase 2b. The next noticeable bottleneck north would not be at Golborne but north of Wigan where it becomes two tracks for a while, and then again north of Preston. But the further north you go, the fewer trains there are or need to be, until you get near Glasgow.

Ah. If only, by now, we were discussing the options for HS2 at the congested Glasgow suburban end.......

How about - Motherwell remodelled. New tunnel under the Clyde, station in a tunnel/box with pedestrian links off each end of the platforms surfacing in the concourses at Glasgow Central and Glasgow Queen Street. Then onwards to Edinburgh as part of SPR (Scottish Powerhouse Rail).

 

[Nottingham59]

Purely hypothetical; but if NPR got built from Liverpool to Marsden with a new station at Manchester Airport and a new station at Piccadilly, could a connecting chord be built from the Styal Line to the NPR Airport station, and then run into the tunnel into Piccadilly? Effectively HS2 is built to Handsacre, then run on the conventional network to Airport, and then back onto the HSR network.

What they could do is drop the idea of a second station at the airport. Build the HS2 station at Piccadilly as planned, with the same tunnel portal, but emerge at Heald Green, next to the airport junction and merge onto the WCML towards Wilmslow.

Running 400m HS2 trains to Euston would give a massive capacity uplift. Trains from the airport to Leeds and Sheffield could use also use the tunnel to avoid conflicts at Slade Lane, whereas airport traffic towards Bolton could use the slow line as now.

NPR then becomes a simple matter of a new line from Warrington low level to the airport station, with a cut-and-cover tunnel across the airport built in stages, and a tunnel from Gorton to Diggle.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A south Manchester parkway station is vital. Removing the Airport station would be a very bad idea. Stockport is presently massively busy with this traffic from wealthy south Manchester and north Cheshire.