Why can HS2 go faster?

[Joseph_Locke]

I cannot cite a reference, but I recall HS2 saying the intent is that all passengers will be in a "booked in advance" seat so no-one should be standing anywhere. "In Advance" could be as late as a few minutes before departure, (via screens, phone apps, etc.) but essentially you won't be sold a ticket unless there's a seat to sit in. Essentially, it's an "airline" style model instead of the "tube/rail" model we are used to in the UK.

I also understand this to be true; on a train (a 200m classic compatible) that has fewer seats than a Pendolino and that is considered full at 80% of seated load.

 

[HSTEd]

This is not going to go down well with people.

 

[transmanche]

That's going to be interesting once the services run onto the mainlines, where people currently enjoy turn-up and go frequencies. I can't imagine that the railway would be happy with the reduced capacity by not allowing people to stand.

Compulsory reservation trains are hardly a new thing in the UK.

AFAIU, reservations are compulsory on all TGV services - not just on the LGV (high-speed) routes, but also when the trains continue onto the lignes classiques. I can't see why this couldn't happen in the UK too.

 

[radamfi]

Does the modelling actually show many overcrowded HS2 services anyway? If most services have enough seats, there will be little need for standing other than in the event of disruption.

 

[edwin_m]

None of that is decided, Preston isn't binned and there is no timetable yet that says there is not enough capacity over Shap either.

If it says there is no capacity it's not a timetable...

 

[Ianno87]

This is not going to go down well with people.

Until "people" get used to selecting their seat on their smartphone as they stroll across Euston concourse and get straight on board...

 

[HSTEd]

Also remember that standing passengers are free money for operators.
THey will not leave that money on the table.

Compulsary reservations are also not really suited to the kind of very short journey times we will see in the UK.
This is not France, where you might spend four hours on a TGV, almost all on an LGV.

Compulsory reservations seem a little silly when the bulk of journeys will be under 90 minutes, and a large fraction will be under an hour.

Until "people" get used to selecting their seat on their smartphone as they stroll across Euston concourse and get straight on board...

Or discover they have to wait on the platform for no reason because the operator has decreed they will not be permitted aboard a train they could obviously fit aboard.

 

[NSEFAN]

Compulsory reservation trains are hardly a new thing in the UK.

AFAIU, reservations are compulsory on all TGV services - not just on the LGV (high-speed) routes, but also when the trains continue onto the lignes classiques. I can't see why this couldn't happen in the UK too.

The majority of trains are turn up and go, and many WCML intercity trains operate as turn up and go regional services further out in the network. Whilst it may be politically convenient to say "look, every passenger has a guaranteed seat on HS2!", making people wait for a seat when they could just stand before doesn't strike me as the way forward. It's certainly not a good use of capacity, something that HS2 is supposed to be providing more of.

 

[Ianno87]

Or discover they have to wait on the platform for no reason because the operator has decreed they will not be permitted aboard a train they could obviously fit aboard.

No one says the app couldn't come with an 'I don't care if I stand' button or "I'll only get a seat if there's a no-show" - the latter with a text notification as the train departs.

 

[HSTEd]

No one says the app couldn't come with an 'I don't care if I stand' button or "I'll only get a seat if there's a no-show" - the latter with a text notification as the train departs.

Then its not compulsory reservation is it?

Also I can't currently think of a single compulsory reservation domestic UK train.... anyone care to enlighten me?

 

[Ianno87]

Then its not compulsory reservation is it?

Also I can't currently think of a single compulsory reservation domestic UK train.... anyone care to enlighten me?

It is if they limit the number issued - e.g. just to the number of tip up seats in vestibules, or whatever. Like Eurostar do when they've got a few extra passengers to shift.

 

[najaB]

I can't currently think of a single compulsory reservation domestic UK train.... anyone care to enlighten me?

Caledonian Sleeper, Night Riviera and Eurostar to Ebbsfleet.

 

[Camden]

I also understand this to be true; on a train (a 200m classic compatible) that has fewer seats than a Pendolino and that is considered full at 80% of seated load.

If it is true, then this is going to be a disaster for Liverpool from launch day. I can see now why the panicked fudge of joining a 200m classic compatible up to one of its trains at Crewe in the latest plans. It would be bad enough regularly having standing passengers, as is forecast due to the determination to leave it off the proper network, but for people - potentially myself - to be at risk of not even being able to reach the city, or leave it, at all at times is an absolute disgrace.

 

[HSTEd]

Caledonian Sleeper, Night Riviera and Eurostar to Ebbsfleet.

The Night Riviera is not compulsory reservation in the seated section is it (ive travelled without a reservation before)? not sure about the Caledonian.
And Eurostar to Ebbsfleet is a little niche isn't it?

It is if they limit the number issued - e.g. just to the number of tip up seats in vestibules, or whatever. Like Eurostar do when they've got a few extra passengers to shift.

So people will not be permitted to stand for 40 minutes to Birmingham?
Also I would hope tip up seats would be included in the regular seat count, otherwise with compulsory reservations - what would be the point of fitting them?

 

[Hadders]

Compulsory reservations will be a disaster.

Consider disruption, which let's face it is reasonably frequent. If it's compulsory reservations then you might not even be able to travel the same day. Say the classic WCML goes down, would we really want to say that HS2 couldn't be used as an alternative to shift people?

 

[The Ham]

I also understand this to be true; on a train (a 200m classic compatible) that has fewer seats than a Pendolino and that is considered full at 80% of seated load.

If we assume 25m stock (which wood be 8 coaches) and we take the draft IEP layouts and remove a row of seats from each coach (based on the 9 coach layouts with the part standard part first coach removed) that would be 529 seats. Although given the levels of first class on ICWC services that's not likely to be enough first class seats (65) and so the draft 8 coach layout, again with the row of seating per coach removed, would result in a seating capacity of 510 seats (92 of which are first class).

Which when compared to an 11 coach 390 which had 589 it is less seats, however when compared to a 9 coach 390 with 469 it would be more, regardless of which version you went for.

I would point out that I've been fairly capacity adverse by taking a whole row of seats for the loss of 1m of coach length and so the maximum decrease in capacity of 79 seats may not be as extreme in real life.

Likewise, it could be that due to the extra coach width that there's 3+2 seating in standard class (before anyone compares this to our current 3+2 seating note the extra width of the coaches). However there could be 3 classes with standard being 3+2, business being 2+2 and first being 2+1. In doing so standard could be marginally cheaper (say 5% cheaper) than current ticket prices, business marginally more (say 10% more and you get something free like a newspaper or a tea/coffee/water) and first class being the same as it currently is for first (with the same level of freebies).

Also, I think that I read somewhere, that Liverpool was due to have 2 tph, which would mean that any loss in seating (max 79 or 13%) on one service would be more than made up for by the second service in the hour reducing demand for seats on any given service.

Yes increasing frequencies will make the service more attractive as well the reduced journey times. However with a total capacity of at least 173% over a single 390 (based on an 11 coach unit) there's still plenty of space for that to happen.

 

[HSTEd]

Would 3+2 really be catastrophic anyway, given the short journey times?

 

[jon0844]

Would 3+2 really be catastrophic anyway, given the short journey times?

3+2 would be fine on a wider train, but if the trains are to be classic compatible then they'll (likely) end up being very cramped and probably not a good idea unless an operator can sell the idea of three classes.

 

[Wychwood93]

3+2 would be fine on a wider train, but if the trains are to be classic compatible then they'll (likely) end up being very cramped and probably not a good idea unless an operator can sell the idea of three classes.

Even with the wider high-speed trains that I know better, in France and Spain, you do not get 3+2 - to me it would be a disaster. These trains are unlikely to be the cheapest trick in town and even for the initial dedicated stock to Brum, I would not want it even for 48 minutes. See what happens!

 

[najaB]

These trains are unlikely to be the cheapest trick in town and even for the initial dedicated stock to Brum, I would not want it even for 48 minutes.

They likely will be as cheap if not cheaper than the current trains. And 3+2 means a 3/5 chance of not having someone next to you rather than 50/50 chance with 2+2.

 

[Dave_Cardboard]

IIRC - the first tranche of rolling stock for (effectively) "phase 1" has been announced as all conventional compatible, so the point may be moot. Dedicated "HS2 only" GC gauge trains aren't due to be procured until phase 2 (possibly as far out phase 2B.)

 

[HSTEd]

3+2 would be fine on a wider train, but if the trains are to be classic compatible then they'll (likely) end up being very cramped and probably not a good idea unless an operator can sell the idea of three classes.

And yet a very large number of journeys are made on 3+2 trains throughout the UK.
Either that or they should go to narrower 2+2 with more standing room.

Even with the wider high-speed trains that I know better, in France and Spain, you do not get 3+2 - to me it would be a disaster. These trains are unlikely to be the cheapest trick in town and even for the initial dedicated stock to Brum, I would not want it even for 48 minutes. See what happens!

These trains will be cheaper to operate than the conventional services they replace, so the Government will do anything price wise to ensure people use them.
And prices can be held down by going to 3+2 in standard.

Or even narrow 2+2 with more standing room.
This is not an Intercity railway, it's journeys are simply too short for the most part.

 

[Hadders]

I'd say a layout like the 395s would be ideal.

 

[The Planner]

If it says there is no capacity it's not a timetable...

You win the pedantry badge for the day, no one knows there is no capacity yet as there isn't a confirmed ITSS.

 

[Altnabreac]

None of that is decided, Preston isn't binned and there is no timetable yet that says there is not enough capacity over Shap either.

<whistles, looks sheepishly skyward, shuffles feet> Yet. </whistles, looks sheepishly skyward, shuffles feet>

You win the pedantry badge for the day, no one knows there is no capacity yet as there isn't a confirmed ITSS.

Lets agree that the position is that Network Rail aren't keen on the idea of splitting at Preston...

 

[edwin_m]

And yet a very large number of journeys are made on 3+2 trains throughout the UK.
Either that or they should go to narrower 2+2 with more standing room.

These trains will be cheaper to operate than the conventional services they replace, so the Government will do anything price wise to ensure people use them.
And prices can be held down by going to 3+2 in standard.

Or even narrow 2+2 with more standing room.
This is not an Intercity railway, it's journeys are simply too short for the most part.

3+2 is generally used on commuter-type journeys, either that are fairly short (less than 30min) or for longer distances into London where capacity is limited, the car is not a practiable alternative and the choice has been made to offer more people a seat albeit not a very comfortable one. HS2 journey will vary from just under an hour for London-Birmingham to 3hr45min for London-Glasgow/Edinburgh and in many cases travellers will have a viable alternative to drive instead. The kind of business traveller that HS2 needs to fulfil its purpose of boosting the economy will also expect to be able to work on the train. So comfort levels are important, particularly as HS2 provides a big boost to capacity so there shouldn't be any need to scrimp on space per seat.

 

[The Ham]

3+2 is generally used on commuter-type journeys, either that are fairly short (less than 30min) or for longer distances into London where capacity is limited, the car is not a practiable alternative and the choice has been made to offer more people a seat albeit not a very comfortable one. HS2 journey will vary from just under an hour for London-Birmingham to 3hr45min for London-Glasgow/Edinburgh and in many cases travellers will have a viable alternative to drive instead. The kind of business traveller that HS2 needs to fulfil its purpose of boosting the economy will also expect to be able to work on the train. So comfort levels are important, particularly as HS2 provides a big boost to capacity so there shouldn't be any need to scrimp on space per seat.

The context of the 3+2 seats was being used in the CC sets to Liverpool where there could be capacity constants.

It was also in the context of 3 classes of tickets with the option of 2+2 seats and 2+1 seats, the latter is first class. As such business users could still opt for for a seat in 2+2 seating. Whilst leisure travelers could get some cheap deals in 3+2 seating, especially if that's where most of the advanced tickets were available.

Based on the assumptions I'd made when suggesting it and that 3+2 was in one coach then there could be a further 20 seats (upto 549 seats) assuming just one coach is used. This would result 104 seats in 3+2 configuration, 65 in first class (2+1) and 380 seats in 2+2.

 

[HSTEd]

3+2 is generally used on commuter-type journeys, either that are fairly short (less than 30min) or for longer distances into London where capacity is limited, the car is not a practiable alternative and the choice has been made to offer more people a seat albeit not a very comfortable one. HS2 journey will vary from just under an hour for London-Birmingham to 3hr45min for London-Glasgow/Edinburgh and in many cases travellers will have a viable alternative to drive instead. The kind of business traveller that HS2 needs to fulfil its purpose of boosting the economy will also expect to be able to work on the train. So comfort levels are important, particularly as HS2 provides a big boost to capacity so there shouldn't be any need to scrimp on space per seat.

And this is the inherent issue with using the same fleet for all HS2 journeys straight out of the gate!
The Birmingham journey is fundamentally different from one to Edinburgh and we should not be trying to use the same fleet for them.

The core journeys to Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds and maybe Liverpool are perfectly acceptable with a high density layout and could result in a real reduction of ticket prices.
I am not sure driving can even meaningfully compete with a less than 70 minute journey time to Manchester myself.

As to capacity, there is always a need for more capacity as the epochal changes in journey times and probable falls in ticket prices will drive demand through the roof.
Ticket prices with 2+3 can be 20% lower than with 2+2

 

[WideRanger]

Most trains operating on the Shinkansen in Japan are 3+2 in the standard class. There are some 2+2 in standard on less busy routes, and even 3+3 on some of the trains aimed at commuters. Because of the wider trains, 3+2 didn't fee cramped at all (but they do have pretty good leg-room which helps).

 

[edwin_m]

I am not sure driving can even meaningfully compete with a less than 70 minute journey time to Manchester myself.

As to capacity, there is always a need for more capacity as the epochal changes in journey times and probable falls in ticket prices will drive demand through the roof.
Ticket prices with 2+3 can be 20% lower than with 2+2

Driving from Euston to Piccadilly will never compete. But for someone in say Hendon wanting to get to Ashton the time on the motorway won't be much different once the access time each end has been included.

Remember also that the classic-compatibles will have to be the width of the Class 800 to fit within the British gauge, whereas most 3+2 stock is slightly wider but even then doesn't give enough width for armrests. So with the prospect of squashing into a seat narrower than Ryanair's, many people will choose to drive as at least it will be comfortable even if it does take a bit longer. Even with a bit more width to play with, I'm not aware of any European high-speed service that uses a 3+2 layout (and the Shinkansen is considerably wider than anything in Europe).

By all means have a coach or two of high-density seating for bargain prices but that shouldn't be the default.