Connection from HS2 to the Birmingham-Derby line.

[Nottingham59]

The Jan 2024 update from HS2 says that "We are also working closely with Network Rail to develop options that enable HS2 trains to reach Nottingham and Sheffield via Derby and Chesterfield on the Midland Main Line."

This could be a connection from the stump of the Eastern Leg, or perhaps some sort of crossover onto the line from New Street to Water Orton. In either case, they would have to electrify Kingsbury to Derby and perhaps add passing capability around Burton-upon-Trent.

What do people think might be proposed?

Curdworth to Middleton construction update - HS2

In March 2023, the Government updated Parliament on their transport capital investment programme. The Transport Secretary’s statement included an update on the HS2 project, recognising significant inflationary pressures across the economy. The Government has reaffirmed its commitment to...

www.hs2.org.uk

 

[The Planner]

The Jan 2024 update from HS2 says that "We are also working closely with Network Rail to develop options that enable HS2 trains to reach Nottingham and Sheffield via Derby and Chesterfield on the Midland Main Line."

This could be a connection from the stump of the Eastern Leg, or perhaps some sort of crossover onto the line from New Street to Water Orton. In either case, they would have to electrify Kingsbury to Derby and perhaps add passing capability around Burton-upon-Trent.

What do people think might be proposed?

Curdworth to Middleton construction update - HS2

In March 2023, the Government updated Parliament on their transport capital investment programme. The Transport Secretary’s statement included an update on the HS2 project, recognising significant inflationary pressures across the economy. The Government has reaffirmed its commitment to...

www.hs2.org.uk

It would need an awful lot of upgrades to the existing line, probably to the point that the proposal of extending the stub to East Mids Pwy is more benficial.

 

[class26]

It would need an awful lot of upgrades to the existing line, probably to the point that the proposal of extending the stub to East Mids Pwy is more benficial.

Including Burton station rebuilding to permit higher speeds ?

 

[The Planner]

Including Burton station rebuilding to permit higher speeds ?

I expect that would be a requirement to get any HS2 journey times down, or at least some track realignment/remodeling if that is cheaper, XC benefiting would be consequential.

 

[Nottingham59]

Including Burton station rebuilding to permit higher speeds ?

Burton already has four tracks. Upgrading the outermost pair to allow 125mph through running would seem to be the easiest way to allow fast trains to overtaking stopping services, if necessary. It might be easier to switch the XC stopping service BHM to Nottingham from class 170 diesel to 125mph high-acceleration EMU, which would be an additional benefit.

It would need an awful lot of upgrades to the existing line

Even at current line speeds, an HS2 service to Derby would be around 15 minutes faster than via the MML:

• HS2 now claim from "Central London" to Curzon St will take 49 minutes, so let's assume the same to get to Kingsbury and round a slow curve to join the Birmingham-Derby line.
• XC Voyager running time from Kingsbury branch Junction to Derby is 24 minutes, with a stop at Burton, giving a total of 1h13m to Derby.

St Pancras to Derby via MML is 1h26m. So it's 13m faster via HS2, with no upgrades.

What upgrades do you think might be necessary (beyond electrification, of course)?

And this would remove 2tph expresses from the MML, which would disproportionately increase capacity for commuters services south of Leicester.

 

[HSTEd]

I think a more likely question is whether it is at all feasible to build a 320kph (HS2's normal operating speed with 360kph only for timetable recovery) electrodiesel train set.

Obviously 250kph is in service, but whether 320kph is practical is another question.

 

[Nottingham59]

I think a more likely question is whether it is at all feasible to build a 320kph (HS2's normal operating speed with 360kph only for timetable recovery) electrodiesel train set.

Obviously 250kph is in service, but whether 320kph is practical is another question.

I'm assuming electrification between Kingsbury and Derby. With 6tph through Burton, the economics would be stronger than electrifying Kettering to Sheffield, which is mostly 4tph.

 

[cle]

That

I'm assuming electrification between Kingsbury and Derby. With 6tph through Burton, the economics would be stronger than electrifying Kettering to Sheffield, which is mostly 4tph.

That would be done by then, and the two would clearly be quite co-dependent.

I do agree that with wires and line speed improvements (and a non-stop run to Derby) - a few extra minutes could be shaved and you might get over 15. Maybe even 20 to Sheffield if that line through Chesterfield had speed improvements too.

And yes the improvements South on the MML would be worthwhile. Both current Sheffield MML services could terminate at Derby, and add calls including Bedford.

If Nottingham was better served on this HS2 deviation, then again - as long as 1-2tph were still fast to Leicester - there would be more to play with on classic MML services.

 

[RobShipway]

If there is a service to Sheffield from using HS2, what would be the point if First Group is able to be running their Open Access service from Kings Cross to Sheffield?

 

[Nottingham59]

If Nottingham was better served on this HS2 deviation, then again - as long as 1-2tph were still fast to Leicester - there would be more to play with on classic MML services.

I don't see how Nottingham to London would work via HS2. It would be just too far, going the long way round.

If HS2 to Derby and Sheffield goes ahead, I'd expect Nottingham - London to become more of a glorified EMR Connect, running 350/360 type EMUs, perhaps 2tph to Corby and 2tph to Leicester and Nottingham.

Which would interwork much better with Thameslink near London, and also release 810s for Cross Country, which really needs bimodes.

 

[The Planner]

Burton already has four tracks. Upgrading the outermost pair to allow 125mph through running would seem to be the easiest way to allow fast trains to overtaking stopping services, if necessary. It might be easier to switch the XC stopping service BHM to Nottingham from class 170 diesel to 125mph high-acceleration EMU, which would be an additional benefit.

Even at current line speeds, an HS2 service to Derby would be around 15 minutes faster than via the MML:

• HS2 now claim from "Central London" to Curzon St will take 49 minutes, so let's assume the same to get to Kingsbury and round a slow curve to join the Birmingham-Derby line.
• XC Voyager running time from Kingsbury branch Junction to Derby is 24 minutes, with a stop at Burton, giving a total of 1h13m to Derby.

St Pancras to Derby via MML is 1h26m. So it's 13m faster via HS2, with no upgrades.

What upgrades do you think might be necessary (beyond electrification, of course)?

Capacity, where is all the freight going?

 

[A S Leib]

If there is a service to Sheffield from using HS2, what would be the point if First Group is able to be running their Open Access service from Kings Cross to Sheffield?

One's planned to be 2 trains per day, at least initially, and the other would probably be one or two trains per hour. It also gives Derby and Sheffield a better connection to Birmingham Airport, which isn't a massive flow now (fewer than 10,000 per year) but I don't know how many people split tickets at New Street or drive and could be tempted with better train connections.

If connecting to the CrossCountry route north of Birmingham, how realistic would it be to build a new line from Curzon Street to south of Bromsgrove, especially with new stations planned (under construction?) on the Camp Hill line? Would the trouble caused by messing around with Curzon Street at this stage of construction make sticking with New Street worth it?

 

[The Planner]

If there is a service to Sheffield from using HS2, what would be the point if First Group is able to be running their Open Access service from Kings Cross to Sheffield?

This part of HS2 is so far away that First Group would likely have been running it for years.

 

[JamesT]

I don't see how Nottingham to London would work via HS2. It would be just too far, going the long way round.

If HS2 to Derby and Sheffield goes ahead, I'd expect Nottingham - London to become more of a glorified EMR Connect, running 350/360 type EMUs, perhaps 2tph to Corby and 2tph to Leicester and Nottingham.

Which would interwork much better with Thameslink near London, and also release 810s for Cross Country, which really needs bimodes.

If the journey time is no worse than on the current route, does it matter that it's the long way round? You can go an awful lot further at 200mph versus 125mph in the same time. If you're travelling end to end, does it matter which stations you travel through or not?
See also the suggestions to serve Leeds-London via Manchester with NPR and a full HS2 West.

 

[The Planner]

f connecting to the CrossCountry route north of Birmingham, how realistic would it be to build a new line from Curzon Street to south of Bromsgrove, especially with new stations planned (under construction?) on the Camp Hill line? Would the trouble caused by messing around with Curzon Street at this stage of construction make sticking with New Street worth it?

For what?

 

[A S Leib]

For what?

To move fast Birmingham–Cheltenham services off of existing lines and free up space for Redditch, Bromsgrove, Worcester and stopping Camp Hill (I don't know the service plan for that) services.

 

[bib]

Well I guess if you decide it's not worth spending £10bn or whatever to bring HS2 to Nottingham, then it makes some sort of sense to connect it to an existing 125mph line, if you can fit in an extra 1-2tph through Wilnecote/Tamworth.

Some sort of flying junction over/under the M42 north of Kingsbury?

Presumably you'd also do whatever needs done to increase speeds for through trains at Burton to something closer to 90mph, unless you're planning on not electrifying Birmingham-Sheffield ... in which case you stop at Burton to connect your 300mph electric banking locos
Could also upgrade the goods bypass lines to avoid the platforms at Burton but that might make it difficult to run anything from the Ivanhoe line into Burton or freight.

• HS2 now claim from "Central London" to Curzon St will take 49 minutes, so let's assume the same to get to Kingsbury and round a slow curve to join the Birmingham-Derby line.
• XC Voyager running time from Kingsbury branch Junction to Derby is 24 minutes, with a stop at Burton, giving a total of 1h13m to Derby.

https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:G25112/2024-01-10/detailed This Voyager running late just did Kingsbury Branch Jn - Derby in 19.5 mins with a 90s stop at Burton, so if you kept that path you could potentially get London-Derby in <67mins, vs 1hr29 typically today. So a 20 min saving for Derby/Chesterfield/Sheffield-London looks reasonably achievable. It would effectively give Derby the current London-Leicester journey time.

For reference IRP had 58 mins London-Derby, which I doubt was based on doing Kingsbury-EMP-Derby in 9mins (since that would be averaging >200mph), so there could be some scope for London-Kingsbury in <49mins (~110mi) (probably depends on whether you stop at Birmingham interchange).

 

[The Planner]

To move fast Birmingham–Cheltenham services off of existing lines and free up space for Redditch, Bromsgrove, Worcester and stopping Camp Hill (I don't know the service plan for that) services.

That is what Midlands Rail Hub will do. Camp Hill is 2tph.

 

[Nottingham59]

I thought they would go for a shorter tighter chord, to avoid extra bridges over the motorway

I reckon that's a curve radius of 400m, which corresponds to a speed limit of around 60mph, I think.

 

[The Planner]

I thought they would go for a shorter tighter chord, to avoid extra bridges over the motorway
View attachment 150023
I reckon that's a curve radius of 400m, which corresponds to a speed limit of around 60mph, I think.

They would just build a bridge over the M42.

 

[Nottingham59]

They would just build a bridge over the M42.

That's a lot of money for DfT to spend in the current climate. I reckon they will go for the cheapest option.

Sunak could boast about how he's bringing HS2 trains to Yorkshire at a twentieth of the cost.

As for freight, there are several paths in the timetable, but only about one freight path per hour is actually used. And there seems to be plenty of scope around Burton and Stenson Junction to build passing loops where the line used to be 4-track.

 

[Arkeeos]

Presuming this government actually gets around to thinking about this within the year, I doubt it will happen to north of Kingsbury, because that's actually building a fair amount of track, and the government doesn't want to spend a single penny more on HS2. They would connect it where it cross over in phase 1, running onto the residual quad tracking of the line, which is presumably not needed anymore. However this is assuming the government wants to deal with HS2 anymore, I expect they will want the bare minimum.

 

[Technologist]

I think a more likely question is whether it is at all feasible to build a 320kph (HS2's normal operating speed with 360kph only for timetable recovery) electrodiesel train set.

Obviously 250kph is in service, but whether 320kph is practical is another question.

Batteries, batteries, batteries.

If you subtract the mass of a Siemens Velaro Novo from a regular Velaro of the same length you would have enough mass to fit battery packs that would allow the train to go a few hundred km at max speed, all within the existing Velaro's axle loads.

So plenty enough to get to Derby from HS2.

 

[The Planner]

That's a lot of money for DfT to spend in the current climate. I reckon they will go for the cheapest option.

Sunak could boast about how he's bringing HS2 trains to Yorkshire at a twentieth of the cost.

As for freight, there are several paths in the timetable, but only about one freight path per hour is actually used. And there seems to be plenty of scope around Burton and Stenson Junction to build passing loops where the line used to be 4-track.

Depends on what the time loss and capacity implications a slow junction has. A bridge is relatively small fry in the overall scheme of things. Just because a path isnt used doesnt mean it can be got rid of, even if there are mechanisms to do so. You would likely need some sort of intervention before Burton, it will need resignalling for a start.

 

[QSK19]

I don't see how Nottingham to London would work via HS2. It would be just too far, going the long way round.

If HS2 to Derby and Sheffield goes ahead, I'd expect Nottingham - London to become more of a glorified EMR Connect, running 350/360 type EMUs, perhaps 2tph to Corby and 2tph to Leicester and Nottingham.

Which would interwork much better with Thameslink near London, and also release 810s for Cross Country, which really needs bimodes.

Aside from the fact that it would relegate the MML to a commuter line whilst still paying IC-level fares (I shiver at the thought of spending all that money and, in return, having to spend up to 2 hours on a knackered 360 with 3+2 seating!), my concern would be Loughborough. It would be in a sort of no-man’s land between Leicester - the northern terminus of one your proposed services - and EMD. Loughborough could potentially go from the 2 IC tph & 1 Regional tph to no mainline services at all (if the train terminating at Nottingham under your proposal doesn’t call between Leicester and Nottingham). Not really befitting of a Cat C1 station - might as well relegate it to Cat F and hold it in the same esteem as Barrow on Soar and the like.

My fear with the eastern stump to EMD was always that Loughborough would be the next Wellingborough, albeit to a far worse extent (at least Wellingborough does get regular 8-car services - Loughborough would potentially get only 1 Regional tph!).

 

[A S Leib]

Aside from the fact that it would relegate the MML to a commuter line whilst still paying IC-level fares (I shiver at the thought of spending all that money and getting nearly 1 3/4 hours on a 360 with 3+2 seating!), my concern would be Loughborough. It would be in a sort of no-man’s land between Leicester - the northern terminus of one your proposed services - and EMD. Loughborough could potentially go from the 2 IC tph & 1 Regional tph to no mainline services at all (if the train terminating at Nottingham under your proposal doesn’t call between Leicester and Nottingham). Not really befitting of a Cat C1 station - might as well relegate it to Cat F and hold it in the same esteem as Barrow on Soar and the like.

My fear with the eastern stump to EMD was always that Loughborough would be the next Wellingborough, albeit to a far worse extent (at least Wellingborough does get regular 8-car services - Loughborough would potentially get only 1 Regional tph!).

What was the plan for Chesterfield, or would that have stayed roughly the same (2 fast London tph, 1-2 York–Birmingham–south)?

 

[ChrisC]

Aside from the fact that it would relegate the MML to a commuter line whilst still paying IC-level fares (I shiver at the thought of spending all that money and, in return, having to spend up to 2 hours on a knackered 360 with 3+2 seating!), my concern would be Loughborough. It would be in a sort of no-man’s land between Leicester - the northern terminus of one your proposed services - and EMD. Loughborough could potentially go from the 2 IC tph & 1 Regional tph to no mainline services at all (if the train terminating at Nottingham under your proposal doesn’t call between Leicester and Nottingham). Not really befitting of a Cat C1 station - might as well relegate it to Cat F and hold it in the same esteem as Barrow on Soar and the like.

My fear with the eastern stump to EMD was always that Loughborough would be the next Wellingborough, albeit to a far worse extent (at least Wellingborough does get regular 8-car services - Loughborough would potentially get only 1 Regional tph!).

I get your point, but Loughborough wouldn’t just be on a stub between Leicester and a northern terminus of Nottingham. What about the line to Derby? There will still need to be trains heading north from Leicester to Derby and almost certainly Sheffield.

 

[30907]

If HS2 to Derby and Sheffield goes ahead, I'd expect Nottingham - London to become more of a glorified EMR Connect, running 350/360 type EMUs, perhaps 2tph to Corby and 2tph to Leicester and Nottingham.

If the OP's suggestion were workable/affordable I would expect Nottingham to have 2tph from London first stop Leicester, and Derby/Sheffield to be 2tph first or second stop Kettering.

 

[Meerkat]

The Jan 2024 update from HS2 says that "We are also working closely with Network Rail to develop options that enable HS2 trains to reach Nottingham and Sheffield via Derby and Chesterfield on the Midland Main Line."

"options that enable"
Could interpret that to just mean finalising what do do with the Eastern stub junction, with options to match DfT 'ambitions'
'Not interested - cost is everything' = delete junction entirely, scorched earth, reduce tracks on top corner of triangle.
'maybe, one day' = no junction but passive allowance/nothing done to prevent it in the future.
'yeah, let's that get that in the future programme' = put the junction in with a stub built.

 

[The Planner]

"options that enable"
Could interpret that to just mean finalising what do do with the Eastern stub junction, with options to match DfT 'ambitions'
'Not interested - cost is everything' = delete junction entirely, scorched earth, reduce tracks on top corner of triangle.
'maybe, one day' = no junction but passive allowance/nothing done to prevent it in the future.
'yeah, let's that get that in the future programme' = put the junction in with a stub built.

The cost of redesign and changes to scope would probably cost as much as just leaving the stub.