As it stands, is it worth ordering HS2 stock?

Dan G · 9 Apr 2024

This isn't fully serious – hey, I'm not in charge – it's more a talking point. With HS2 now seemingly limited to only Old Oak Common to Birmingham Curzon Street and then onwards on legacy lines, is it worth buying new rolling stock for the service? Run the Pendolinos at 140 mph/225 kph to Curzon Street, then let them tilt at 125 mph to Manchester and beyond, faster than any new non-tilting stock will be able to make the journey.

(I have no idea what the plans are/were for the Pendolinos post phase 1 opening. Are they to keep running the existing Euston-New Street service?)

RailUK Forums

Bletchleyite · 9 Apr 2024

Dan G said:
(I have no idea what the plans are/were for the Pendolinos post phase 1 opening. Are they to keep running the existing Euston-New Street service?)

The initial opening replaces just one train per hour out of Euston, I believe, so still in use!

Past that when Manchester etc start running on HS2 the case for dedicated stock grows, though my view remains that 200m is a bad plan and 275/300m would make more sense.

zwk500 · 9 Apr 2024

Dan G said:
This isn't fully serious – hey, I'm not in charge – it's more a talking point. With HS2 now seemingly limited to only Old Oak Common to Birmingham Curzon Street and then onwards on legacy lines, is it worth buying new rolling stock for the service? Run the Pendolinos at 140 mph/225 kph to Curzon Street, then let them tilt at 125 mph to Manchester and beyond, faster than any new non-tilting stock will be able to make the journey.

(I have no idea what the plans are/were for the Pendolinos post phase 1 opening. Are they to keep running the existing Euston-New Street service?)

The short answer is yes, because the new services are planned to run at 320kph+ so Pendos won't cut it, and they'll need ETCS L2 fitted which is expensive to do on Pendos, especially as you are taking trains out of service to fit them.

Also, the tilt mechanism is very heavy and results in a very high floor for pendos which can make the seats feel quite cramped as the train squishes into the tilt profile loading gauge, all of which is better to avoid when you've just built a new railway to remove the need to tilt.

The Planner · 9 Apr 2024

zwk500 said:
The short answer is yes, because the new services are planned to run at 320kph+ so Pendos won't cut it, and they'll need ETCS L2 fitted which is expensive to do on Pendos, especially as you are taking trains out of service to fit them.

Also, the tilt mechanism is very heavy and results in a very high floor for pendos which can make the seats feel quite cramped as the train squishes into the tilt profile loading gauge, all of which is better to avoid when you've just built a new railway to remove the need to tilt.

390s have to have the upgrade anyway due to ETCS being installed north of Warrington.

Dan G · 9 Apr 2024

zwk500 said:
The short answer is yes, because the new services are planned to run at 320kph+ so Pendos won't cut it, and they'll need ETCS L2 fitted which is expensive to do on Pendos, especially as you are taking trains out of service to fit them.

Also, the tilt mechanism is very heavy and results in a very high floor for pendos which can make the seats feel quite cramped as the train squishes into the tilt profile loading gauge, all of which is better to avoid when you've just built a new railway to remove the need to tilt.

The Pendolinos will be faster than HS2 stock north of Birmingham; the fact that new stock would make the London-Birmingham journey in 70% of the time Pendos could doesn't seem compelling to me.

I've never heard a complaint about the passenger experience in a Pendolino.

Sorcerer · 9 Apr 2024

Considering the Pendolinos will be reaching the end of their life by the time HS2 opens, it's not worth upgrading them to run on a new dedicated high-speed line with vastly different signalling, and seeing as you will need more rolling stock to replace them, you might as well make them high-speed trains that can reach the planned operational speeds of HS2. I am inclined to agree that 200m long trains is a bit short compared to the 265m of an 11-coach 390, but seeing as the HS2 stock won't be used for commuting on the southern WCML and may end up with mandatory reservations, it shouldn't be too much of an issue for capacity. If ordered today though I would argue 225m (9 coaches of 25m) would be most optimal since that's roughly the same length as a nine-coach Pendolino and can have as much capacity as an eleven-coach one if planned right.

Bald Rick · 9 Apr 2024

Dan G said:
The Pendolinos will be faster than HS2 stock north of Birmingham

North of Handsacre. And not that much quicker.

Peter Mugridge · 9 Apr 2024

Further, the initial order that was announced was simply for the Phase 1 services anyway.

That implies they'll still need the same number. If anything, with services being slower once past Handsacre they may find they need more, not fewer, built...

Trainbike46 · 9 Apr 2024

Bletchleyite said:
The initial opening replaces just one train per hour out of Euston, I believe, so still in use!

Past that when Manchester etc start running on HS2 the case for dedicated stock grows, though my view remains that 200m is a bad plan and 275/300m would make more sense.

I disagree; In my view, the trains should either be the maximum length they can be for the infrastructure (so 400m), or half that so they can run coupled. Ordering other lengths would be very short-sighted as we will need the full capacity of a 400m train in time

In the short term, it is essential to upgrade Crewe as initially planned in HS2, to allow for 400m trains and to allow splitting and joining to make the most of scarce capacity south of Crewe

Peter Mugridge said:
Further, the initial order that was announced was simply for the Phase 1 services anyway.

That implies they'll still need the same number. If anything, with services being slower once past Handsacre they may find they need more, not fewer, built...

This is why all the suggestions from government about reducing the order size made zero sense to me...

Bletchleyite · 9 Apr 2024

Trainbike46 said:
I disagree; In my view, the trains should either be the maximum length they can be for the infrastructure (so 400m)

The maximum length for most of the infrastructure (London-Brum is a fraction of it) is 265m, the length of an 11 car Pendolino. It's probably economic to get that to 275 or 300 with minor works (a mix of both may be prudent).

With that, I refer to your point with regard to it being inefficient to run short trains - 200m instead of 275-300.

Grimsby town · 9 Apr 2024

Bald Rick said:
North of Handsacre. And not that much quicker.

I'd question if they're even quicker to Manchester via Crewe. I worked out that a train from Handsacre without tilt would lose a maximum of 2 minutes via Crewe. Considering HS2 trains will accelerate quicker than pendos, I'd be surprised if they were timed for longer.

Bald Rick · 9 Apr 2024

Grimsby town said:
I'd question if they're even quicker to Manchester via Crewe. I worked out that a train from Handsacre without tilt would lose a maximum of 2 minutes via Crewe. Considering HS2 trains will accelerate quicker than pendos, I'd be surprised if they were timed for longer.

Roger Ford wrote an article about exactly that in the Modern Railways before last. Between Handsacre and Manchester via Crewe a Pendolino is quicker, but as you say, not a lot.

Trainbike46 · 9 Apr 2024

Bletchleyite said:
The maximum length for most of the infrastructure (London-Brum is a fraction of it) is 265m, the length of an 11 car Pendolino. It's probably economic to get that to 275 or 300 with minor works (a mix of both may be prudent).

With that, I refer to your point with regard to it being inefficient to run short trains - 200m instead of 275-300.

Long term Manchester needs to get High Speed Rail all the way (including 400m platforms). If not from HS2, this should be included with NPR/HS3/whatever we are calling an East-west high-speed line in the north this week

Bletchleyite · 9 Apr 2024

Trainbike46 said:
Long term Manchester needs to get High Speed Rail all the way (including 400m platforms). If not from HS2, this should be included with NPR/HS3/whatever we are calling an East-west high-speed line in the north this week

Yes, but it's not going to be any time soon. Constraining the operation in the meantime is just nuts, particularly when it comes to Scotland. If 275/300m units are an annoyance by then they can be shortened or cascaded.

snowball · 9 Apr 2024

Trainbike46 said:
Long term Manchester needs to get High Speed Rail all the way (including 400m platforms). If not from HS2, this should be included with NPR/HS3/whatever we are calling an East-west high-speed line in the north this week

As I understand it HS3/NPR is not planned to have 400m trains, so you may need resuscitation of HS2 phase 2b if you want to get 400m platforms at Piccadilly.

HSTEd · 10 Apr 2024

Bletchleyite said:
Yes, but it's not going to be any time soon. Constraining the operation in the meantime is just nuts, particularly when it comes to Scotland. If 275/300m units are an annoyance by then they can be shortened or cascaded.

Or indeed, lengthened to 400m to be used on Birmingham services, given that the core is unlikely to be full any time soon.

snowball said:
As I understand it HS3/NPR is not planned to have 400m trains, so you may need resuscitation of HS2 phase 2b if you want to get 400m platforms at Piccadilly.

AFAIK, no plan for NPR in Manchester exists other than using the proposed HS2 station, despite the best attempts of Burnham to get an underground station.
Its unlikely an underground station would be affordable on the budget.

Dan G · 10 Apr 2024

Bald Rick said:
Roger Ford wrote an article about exactly that in the Modern Railways before last. Between Handsacre and Manchester via Crewe a Pendolino is quicker, but as you say, not a lot.

That's good to hear

D365 · 10 Apr 2024

The Planner said:
390s have to have the upgrade anyway due to ETCS being installed north of Warrington.

Which will be funded by Trillink, not the HS2 workstream as such!

Sorcerer said:
Considering the Pendolinos will be reaching the end of their life by the time HS2 opens, it's not worth upgrading them to run on a new dedicated high-speed line with vastly different signalling, and seeing as you will need more rolling stock to replace them, you might as well make them high-speed trains that can reach the planned operational speeds of HS2.

Vehicle lifespan is a valid point.

Bald Rick · 10 Apr 2024

The obvious solution (to me, at least) is to buy trains that are around 250 metres now, and can fit on the existing infrastructure without any platform extensions etc, and then when the line does get all the way to Manchester, buy some extra vehicles to make them 400m / 2x200m. Like we did with the Pendolinos, HSTs, etc etc.

The Planner · 10 Apr 2024

D365 said:
Which will be funded by Trillink, not the HS2 workstream as such!

Vehicle lifespan is a valid point.

TriLink is just a fancy name for NR having to pay for it.

D365 · 10 Apr 2024

The Planner said:
TriLink is just a fancy name for NR having to pay for it.

Indeed - I'm looking forward to getting my teeth into it...

snowball · 10 Apr 2024

HSTEd said:
AFAIK, no plan for NPR in Manchester exists other than using the proposed HS2 station, despite the best attempts of Burnham to get an underground station.
Its unlikely an underground station would be affordable on the budget.

I agree, but neither I, nor the person I was replying to, nor the person he was replying to, said anything about an underground station.

HSTEd · 10 Apr 2024

snowball said:
I agree, but neither I, nor the person I was replying to, nor the person he was replying to, said anything about an underground station.

If Burnham doesn't get his underground station then the platforms NPR will use will be the ones that were designed for HS2 and will thus be 400m long

Krokodil · 10 Apr 2024

HSTEd said:
If Burnham doesn't get his underground station then the platforms NPR will use will be the ones that were designed for HS2 and will thus be 400m long

I wouldn't put it past the powers that be to cut the lengths down to 200m in pursuit of some short-term cost saving.

snowball · 10 Apr 2024

Krokodil said:
I wouldn't put it past the powers that be to cut the lengths down to 200m in pursuit of some short-term cost saving.

That was the point I was trying to make. If HS2 phase 2b is not revived, somebody will probably decide that the HS2 proposals for Piccadilly are too grandiose for just NPR. Apologies for being unclear. I thought it was obvious.

mangyiscute · 10 Apr 2024

Dan G said:
I've never heard a complaint about the passenger experience in a Pendolino.

Is this serious? Pendolinos are awful trains to travel in, they feel cramped and dark since the windows are so small and the carriages are quite a bit smaller than usual too. You often get seats with no window view at all, which is awful - something like the 80x is so much lighter and feels way larger inside, plus it surely has quite a few more seats per carriage too.

D365 · 10 Apr 2024

mangyiscute said:
Is this serious? Pendolinos are awful trains to travel in, they feel cramped and dark since the windows are so small and the carriages are quite a bit smaller than usual too. You often get seats with no window view at all, which is awful - something like the 80x is so much lighter and feels way larger inside, plus it surely has quite a few more seats per carriage too.

Exactly my thoughts. Other than the shorter units, I’d argue a Voyager is more pleasant than a Pendolino.

Bald Rick · 10 Apr 2024

mangyiscute said:
Is this serious? Pendolinos are awful trains to travel in, they feel cramped and dark since the windows are so small and the carriages are quite a bit smaller than usual too. You often get seats with no window view at all, which is awful - something like the 80x is so much lighter and feels way larger inside, plus it surely has quite a few more seats per carriage too.

I have to disagree. They don‘t feel at all cramped, and no im not short. Yes they are smaller in the interior than other long distance trains, but that doesnt equal cramped.

And in my 20+ years of travelling on them 2-3 times a month, I have never, ever had a seat without a window.

danbarjon · 10 Apr 2024

mangyiscute said:
Is this serious? Pendolinos are awful trains to travel in, they feel cramped and dark since the windows are so small and the carriages are quite a bit smaller than usual too. You often get seats with no window view at all, which is awful - something like the 80x is so much lighter and feels way larger inside, plus it surely has quite a few more seats per carriage too.

I agree, it feels cramped and personally I don't like the tilt of the pendolinos as at night especially there has been travel sickness for myself.

JonathanH · 11 Apr 2024

Bald Rick said:
And in my 20+ years of travelling on them 2-3 times a month, I have never, ever had a seat without a window.

It would however be impossible to deny that some seat pairs on Pendolinos are lined up with the pillar between windows

As it stands, is it worth ordering HS2 stock?

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Veteran Member