• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Would anywhere in the UK would benefit from short stretches of high-speed line?

Status
Not open for further replies.

tasky

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2018
Messages
384
One quite striking thing about German high-speed rail development compared with HS2, or France LGVs, is a lot of their high-speed lines are much shorter, and built strategically to fill gaps in their network.

So for instance, the Mannheim–Stuttgart high-speed line line is just 61 miles long, Erfurt–Leipzig/Halle is 76 miles. They are planning Hanau-Gelnhausen as well which is something like 15 miles.

Are there any places in the UK where short-ish lines might be appropriate?

Obviously HS3/NPR from Liverpool to Leeds via Manchester might fall into this category
There have been ideas floating around Glasgow to Edinburgh, too.

Are there any others that might make sense?

One idea that I think would make sense is a line between Leicester and Coventry. It currently takes over an hour between tho cities with a change (which have populations of 350,000 and 325,000 respectively and only 24 miles apart).

A line could connect to the existing line at Exhall at one end and join the Midland Main Line south of Wigston to avoid constructing in built-up areas, and partially follow the M69 route. It could probably get the journey between the two cities down to something like 15-20 minutes (its 26 miles by road and takes 44 minutes in a car).

If you combined it with a re-doubling, electrification, and junctions with HS2 on part of the Leamington to Coventry line, you'd in theory be able to run HS2 services from London to Coventry and Leicester.

London-Coventry would be down from an hour to about 25 minutes, London-Leicester 40 minutes down from an hour, and you could potentially continue services to Nottingham on the MML which would be good for regional connectivity – Coventry Nottingham is currently just under two hours by train and requires a change despite the two fairly large cities being 40 miles apart! (You'd probably be looking at 40 minutes Leicester to Nottingham assuming the only thing you did to the MML was electrify it.)

There wouldn't be the slots on HS2 phase 1 to do the London services at the moment, but were a future eastern high speed line to take some of the traffic to Yorkshire off HS2, it would be a good candidate for using the rest of the capacity (and also justify building the line via Cambridge/Lincoln/Doncaster instead of via Leicester.)
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tasky

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2018
Messages
384
I've got the crayons out on the Leicester idea here, please destroy it

Edit: thinking about it there's probably no need to follow the M69, as there's not much in the way to go around

crayonista.png
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
104,564
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
The majority of the capacity issues (the primary aim of HS2) are between Euston and Milton Keynes Central. So how about Euston to somewhere just south of Bletchley as a 140mph line (so Pendolinos could be used at full speed)? Could also offer the benefits of very high speed commuter services, say 2tph of 240m non-stop Euston-MK(-Wolverton-Northampton) in 20 mins and bin off the rest of HS2?

(Note, I wouldn't expect a Bletchley stop, but one *could* then be inserted on the present "fast line" services instead giving a 25-30 ish minute journey time with a stop at Leighton. I'm only proposing to join the WCML at Bletchley because there is a clear way in without knocking hundreds of houses down)
 
Last edited:

LLivery

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2014
Messages
1,591
Location
London
A 225km/h line from the Old Oak area to Reading via Heathrow to increase GW capacity. Taking the InterCity services off the mains, freeing up space for more intensive Thames Valley service, with direct trains from Paddington to all the Valley branches (electrification/battery power permitting). Crossrail may then also find a western termination point for its Paddington terminators. Having the InterCity trains going directly through Heathrow would also greatly improve the connectivity above that of the Western access plan and you'd be able to squeeze in more freights.
 

tasky

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2018
Messages
384
The majority of the capacity issues (the primary aim of HS2) are between Euston and Milton Keynes Central. So how about Euston to somewhere just south of Bletchley as a 140mph line (so Pendolinos could be used at full speed)? Could also offer the benefits of very high speed commuter services, say 2tph of 240m non-stop Euston-MK(-Wolverton-Northampton) in 20 mins and bin off the rest of HS2?

(Note, I wouldn't expect a Bletchley stop, but one *could* then be inserted on the present "fast line" services instead giving a 25-30 ish minute journey time with a stop at Leighton. I'm only proposing to join the WCML at Bletchley because there is a clear way in without knocking hundreds of houses down)

I suppose this would be a cheaper way of getting some of the benefits of HS2 - though isn't the messing around at Euston with tunnelling etc the disproportionately expensive bit anyway?
 

tasky

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2018
Messages
384
A 225km/h line from the Old Oak area to Reading via Heathrow to increase GW capacity. Taking the InterCity services off the mains, freeing up space for more intensive Thames Valley service, with direct trains from Paddington to all the Valley branches (electrification/battery power permitting). Crossrail may then also find a western termination point for its Paddington terminators. Having the InterCity trains going directly through Heathrow would also greatly improve the connectivity above that of the Western access plan and you'd be able to squeeze in more freights.

I have often wondered about high-speed bypasses on the GWML - how constrained is capacity from Paddington to Old Oak, though?
 

PeterC

Established Member
Joined
29 Sep 2014
Messages
4,399
I suppose this would be a cheaper way of getting some of the benefits of HS2 - though isn't the messing around at Euston with tunnelling etc the disproportionately expensive bit anyway?
I did wonder about that when HS2 was first announced.
 

Gareth

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2011
Messages
1,505
Switch the fast and slow lines between Liverpool South Parkway and Edge Hill around. Drop the (new) fasts into a tunnel around the Wellington Road area, under Edge Hill, coming out at Lime Street in or adjacent to the southern shed.
 

Gareth

Established Member
Joined
10 Mar 2011
Messages
1,505
Probably not enough demand to justify but March to somewhere east of Norwich, missing out the Ely kink and reversal.
 
Last edited:

tasky

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2018
Messages
384
Exeter-Plymouth, with a branch to Newton Abbot

Have thought this myself - currently an hour journey, should be 15-20 minutes if a more direct route was taken. Would transform commuting between the two cities and speed up all services to Plymouth and Cornwall from everywhere else in the country by 45 minutes. Also solves Dawlish problem.

One drawback is you might need to do some tunnelling under Dartmoor (assuming you take a direct route) because it's a national park.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
17,729
The majority of the capacity issues (the primary aim of HS2) are between Euston and Milton Keynes Central. So how about Euston to somewhere just south of Bletchley as a 140mph line (so Pendolinos could be used at full speed)? Could also offer the benefits of very high speed commuter services, say 2tph of 240m non-stop Euston-MK(-Wolverton-Northampton) in 20 mins and bin off the rest of HS2?

(Note, I wouldn't expect a Bletchley stop, but one *could* then be inserted on the present "fast line" services instead giving a 25-30 ish minute journey time with a stop at Leighton. I'm only proposing to join the WCML at Bletchley because there is a clear way in without knocking hundreds of houses down)
Good luck in doing Euston to Bletchley in 20 minutes at 140mph unless you can make all the approaches to Euston from Wembley onwards 140mph.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
104,564
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
Good luck in doing Euston to Bletchley in 20 minutes at 140mph unless you can make all the approaches to Euston from Wembley onwards 140mph.

Yes, my proposal includes a tunnel into London in the manner currently planned for HS2 - the Euston approaches and around Wembley are just as much of an issue as the Harrow-Bletchley stretch. Whereas there's a bit more space on the fasts after Ledburn where the present LNRs move to the slows to call at Leighton.
 
Last edited:

anme

Established Member
Joined
8 Aug 2013
Messages
1,777
The obvious one would be from Dorchester to Exeter. This journey is currently very slow by rail.
 

Indigo Soup

Established Member
Joined
17 May 2018
Messages
1,424
Morpeth ?
Morpeth and York were the two that sprung to my mind. A good chunk of the ECML south of Doncaster too, but then that's being bypassed a long way to the west.

An Edinburgh to Glasgow high speed line is a perennial favourite, but it's really just a Scottish Government vanity project when you start looking at the economics.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
32,947
Would reinstating the Leamside line speed up traffic on the ECML?
I don’t think so. The Leamside route itself would probably be slower, especially in the area of the Wear crossing, but AIUI the proposals have usually been about diverting freight that way. So it would appear it just allows for slightly more paths for trains running at the existing speeds on the route via Durham.
 

tasky

Member
Joined
30 Oct 2018
Messages
384
The obvious one would be from Dorchester to Exeter. This journey is currently very slow by rail.

Perhaps there's really a case for a full-length high-speed line here: Plymouth – Exeter – Bournemouth – Southampton – Guildford – London (With a spur to Portsmouth)
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,959
Location
Torbay
I don’t think so. The Leamside route itself would probably be slower, especially in the area of the Wear crossing, but AIUI the proposals have usually been about diverting freight that way. So it would appear it just allows for slightly more paths for trains running at the existing speeds on the route via Durham.
Durham is also bigger in passenger usage, at 2.748 million pa (in 2017/18), than Darlington at 2.325m, and nearly a third of Newcastle Central at 8.757m, so a diversion of longer distance services away from this station could be a a commercial mistake. It is a significant regional railhead and tourist destination. It would be a similar mistake as missing out Newton Abbot and Totnes on Exeter to Plymouth Expresses where the total passenger usage of these towns adds up to nearly two thirds of either one of the the two cities. I'd support new high speed Exeter-Newton and Totnes-Plymouth lines though as journey times need to improve.
 
Last edited:

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,959
Location
Torbay
Perhaps there's really a case for a full-length high-speed line here: Plymouth – Exeter – Bournemouth – Southampton – Guildford – London (With a spur to Portsmouth)
If it's a faster journey time to Exeter you're looking for, I'd suggest about a 10 mile diversion on the B&H, bypassing Hungerford, Bedwyn and Crofton curve. Beyond Exeter, a 12 mile Dawlish Diversion to Newton Abbot, saving about 5 miles over the coastal route, and a new Totnes - Plymouth alignment (from near Wrangaton) closely following the A38, perhaps as part of a motorway standard upgrade.
 

Nunners

Member
Joined
19 Oct 2018
Messages
317
The one I would build is a link under St. Pancras from HS2 and the WCML at Euston to the ECML and HS1 east of Kings Cross. Very short, but can be used to extend international services/southeastern or ecml to heathrow
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
9,276
Go full on and build a new electric line from just east of Plympton, south of Ivybridge (with a parkway station right next to the A38 junction) to just west of Totnes.
Very expensive but much faster and means electrifying/straightening the route mainly off line so less disruption.
 

LLivery

Established Member
Joined
13 Jul 2014
Messages
1,591
Location
London
I have often wondered about high-speed bypasses on the GWML - how constrained is capacity from Paddington to Old Oak, though?

I don't know for certain, however, it is at least six tracks until Old Oak, so I can't imagine there being a problem. London Paddington itself however, may well be a different story.

I'd have a tunnel from just west of Old Oak, rather gently curving through to Heathrow, emerging west of Windsor. Above ground, a rather straight line then into a tunnel under the east of Reading, connecting back onto the GWML where the North Down line meets.
 

swt_passenger

Veteran Member
Joined
7 Apr 2010
Messages
32,947
The one I would build is a link under St. Pancras from HS2 and the WCML at Euston to the ECML and HS1 east of Kings Cross. Very short, but can be used to extend international services/southeastern or ecml to heathrow
Impossible to build. No space remaining underground, far too tight curves, excess gradients, no room for straight platforms.
 

option

Member
Joined
1 Aug 2017
Messages
637
What are you classifying as high-speed?
If it's over 125mph, then is it 140mph or 186mph?

York-Darlington 40miles
100 > 24mins
125 > 19mins
140 > 17mins
186 > 13mins


Or is getting more stretches up to 125mph more worthwhile.
Birmingham-Bristol
lets say you could get 80miles of that up from 100mph to 125mph, that takes off 9minutes.
 

The Planner

Veteran Member
Joined
15 Apr 2008
Messages
17,729
Stoke Works to Yate is 67 miles and is the only realistic piece that could be done, and unless you stop serving Cheltenham you won't be getting anywhere near 8 minutes that potentially allows.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top