Puffing Devil
Established Member
- Joined
- 11 Apr 2013
- Messages
- 2,773
And that's what we'll get, with the addition of a HS spine to London.
That's not in the plan - all that's mapped is the Y to Leeds and Manchester.
And that's what we'll get, with the addition of a HS spine to London.
Certainly not Liverpool, that gets HS2 trains in Phase 1.
Leeds/Newcastle pretty integral to Phase 2B.
Some disruption while construction takes place. Apart from that, no I don't.Do you foresee any negative consequences of HS2?
Thank you.Some disruption while construction takes place. Apart from that, no I don't.
Maybe because I work in the industry, and have experience with HS1.Thank you.
Interesting how I can see nothing but failure and mistakes, you only success and achievements.
Completely irrelevant to most people’s considetions given its at least 15 years away assuming it opens on time .Leeds/Newcastle pretty integral to Phase 2B.
Interesting how I can see nothing but failure and mistakes, you only success and achievements.
Liverpool may get the trains, it's not getting the line.
Completely irrelevant to most people’s considetions given its at least 15 years away assuming it opens on time .
Unless there is a huge cut in pricing the growth in passenger numbers will not happen. The broadband speed that you talk about in your post has cut business travel, commuters would not be able to afford it and leisure travellers can easily spare the time for a much cheaper fare. See again the number of people that take the LNWR train to London from Crewe to save a few £££
Just had a thought.
What were First group proposing as a timetable for Horizon Trains? Seem to remember some press coverage was saying more stops at more stations and possibly mini Pendolinos?
Now surely they'd have had to have worked this around the existing Very High Frequency timetable? But were they proposing a way of getting more out of it?
Do you foresee any negative consequences of HS2?
I can think of some:
But these negatives have to be balanced against the positive gains. On that basis, I support the construction of HS2.
- Any major infrastructure project causes immediate localised environmental damage and HS2 is no exception. Regardless of any mitigation measures, there will be a negative environmental effect.
- Any major infrastructure project causes immediate localised disruption to the people living on/near the site. Regardless of any compensation, people's lives will be affected negatively.
- Local services on the MML, WCML, ECML, Chiltern Main Line and probably other lines will change. I doubt that all those changes will be good for everyone. Some journeys will be "worse", for a given and subjective definition of "worse".
- A potential negative: HS2 will be under a lot of pressure to succeed. If it fails to live up to expectations, it could have severe repercussions for the rail industry as a whole.
Look at why specific trains are crowded, and either retime them or add extra carriages. Reroute services to underused destinations. Reexamine ticket prices to see if a fairer pricing regime could spread passengers over a wider set of services.
Invest where it matters. Expand the WCML at its pinch points, rather than build a new railway with no intermediate stations. Use money to focus on regional hotspots.
Consider taking people *away* from the railway where appropriate. Invest in high speed BroadBand, rebalance the economy to reduce strain on commuter railways.
Think differently.
I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.
WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant
How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?
You are getting investment:
Liverpool - Manchester Chat Moss Electrification
Liverpool - Wigan Electrification
Lime Street Station Rebuild/Re-signalling
Ordsall Chord
Manchester - Bolton Electrification
Blackpool Electrification
Srapping of Pacers by Cascaded Stock - 150s, 156s, 158s, 170s, 319s
Northern New 195 DMUs
Northern New 331 EMUs
TPE New 802 BiModes
TPE New Mk5 stock
TPE New 397 EMUs
LNER New 800 Bimodes
Proposed/Future Enhancements
Trans Pennine Improvement/Electrification
Piccadilly Extra Platforms
HS3/Northern Powerhouse Rail
Plus you will benefit from HS2, journey times from Preston to London will improve by at least 30 mins when phase 1 to Birmingham opens increasing to at least an hour when phase 2 opens. Plus you get new stock to replace/complement the Pendolinos.
I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.
WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant
How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?
But if I live in Preston I don't really care about getting to London 30 minutes quicker. I'm far more likely to be going to Manchester or Liverpool, or anywhere not the other side of the country.
Out of interest what did the IC110 project involve?But, actually, some people in Preston do care about getting to London quicker. And some people in London care about getting to Preston quicker. Hence the West Coast electrification in the 60s and 70s, and the IC110 project in the early 90s, and the WCRM project in the 00s, all of which reduced the London - Preston (and other places) journey time.
Out of interest what did the IC110 project involve?
Raising the speed of the fast lines to a ruling 110mph. Mostly track /OLE realignment, staff safety (new walkways, positions of safety etc) and some level crossing changes. It was all done by about 1992. The higher linespeed could only be used by Class 90s and MkIII stock.
Knocked a few minutes off the London - Manchester / Liverpool / NW / Scotland times.
No mention of freight in there.I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.
WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant
How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?
No mention of freight in there.
Fair point - the D.C. lines between Harrow and Watford could take more trains, with a fair bit of cash spent on it.
Doesn’t help anybody who wants to travel to/from anywhere north of Watford of course...
But, actually, some people in Preston do care about getting to London quicker. And some people in London care about getting to Preston quicker.
Hence the West Coast electrification in the 60s and 70s, and the IC110 project in the early 90s, and the WCRM project in the 00s, all of which reduced the London - Preston (and other places) journey time.
They really don't. Not a single person will have ever not gone from Preston to London or vice versa because it takes 30 minutes too long.
Which as you say benefited places other than London. HS2 will do nothing for anywhere north of Birmingham.
They really don't. Not a single person will have ever not gone from Preston to London or vice versa because it takes 30 minutes too long.
Which as you say benefited places other than London. HS2 will do nothing for anywhere north of Birmingham.
It's quite rare these days to pass freight too. If freight is the issue, build a line for freight at a fraction of the cost of HS2. It isn't.
I still refuse to believe the WCML is full. Anyone who's spent a reasonable amount of time using it knows it can't be. Fast line trains pass surprisingly few trains on the slow lines. The number of trains per hour from many stations is not high. The DC lines from Harrow and Wealdstone to Watford Junction are only 3 trains an hour. For tracks alongside this supposedly full railway that's pitiful, but also explains the real "problem", which is everyone south of Milton Keynes wants a fast train to London. The actual problem is so many people wanting or needing to commute to London.
WCML capacity would be massively improved if, for example, people commuted northbound to Milton Keynes instead of going to London from, say, Hemel Hempstead. It'd be quicker and more pleasant
How much capacity is wasted by LNR trains crossing from slow to fast and their multitude of stopping patterns?